I would like my 3 year old grand-daughter to stay with me for one night, but my daughter in law says NO, AIBU?

[redyam]

I bit of background, this is not me, but I will write as though it is, for a friend.

I sea my grand-daughter every few weeks, we live about 100 miles away from each other. We either go down to my sons house or they come up to stay for the weekend.

We all get on really well, my grand-daughter is delightful, and behaves as good as gold whenever we spend time with her or go out for trips.

I would like to take my 3 year old grand-daughter on an overnight outing nearby. We will take her out for the evening (not late) without the parents, spend the night with her, then bring her back to her parents the next day.

I think it will do her the world of good, give me some quality time with her, and give her parents a night off to do what they want. I'm sure my GD would love it.

However my daughter-in-law says NO! No reason given, to flat out refusal. I'm a little hurt really, as though I can't be trusted with my grand-daughter.

Am I being unreasonable to want to do this, or to feel hurt?

fluffyraggies I wouldnt want my mum to stay in my house and she wouldnt want to stay at mine. What if you had a emergency where it wasnt possible for her to stay at yours and your children had never stayed out before? I feel quite sad that you and your DH have never had a lie in and lazy day together because they are not allowed to stay out and you have a perfectly trustworthy mum. MIL might be like you with regards to territory.

honeytea
doesn't everyone live less that 80 miles from the beach in the uk?

Just looked up our distance, google is great, it's 82 miles to nearest beach apparently as crow flies but 105.78 miles by road and it doesn't mention public transport.

There are closer coasts to where we holiday but because of connections and transport links they actually take much longer to get to. Train system is quicker north/south where we are.

We can't actually get a bus to one of the nearby cities - much closer than 80 miles because they don't exist.

Once you start having to pay for the DC on trains and buses even getting into our town center gets expensive.

Once my DCs got to about 5ish and over they did do sleeps at nans.

I'm still kind kind of posting with the 3 and under mind-set. Sorry.

I'm not sure how much 211 miles, there and back, of petrol is but I doubt is as little as a pound or free.

Mega bus you can get for a pound though. I go to london from Bristol for a pound very regular.

Not heard of them - but went and did quick look 25 and 40 pound quoted plus we'd have to pay for travel to the pick up point in nearest place they leave from again not cheap.

Still worth knowing about as could be useful in future.

I think if going to the beach is such an important step in a child's life that the parents want to be the 1st to do it then surely most people could save up a little and go to the beach? If a family has no luxeries, no money for moblie phone contracts, no big tv, no games consoles, no take aways, no new clothes, no hair dye, there is support you can get in terms of benifits?

My mum was a single mum in the 80's she managed to take us to the beach, lots of different beaches. We climed mountains and swan in rivers and went on cycle/camping holidays. We had no TV and had only 2nd hand clothes and ate very very basic food but there was enough money for trips, personally I think it is just a case of what you prioritise.

Megabus routes don't go everywhere from everywhere. I have a choice of under ten destinations from my location, and none of them are coastal. The less popular routes would also cost more than a pound each.

The pound ones are last minute, jheeze £40 is harsh if I pre booked I would spend only spend £9.

honeytea - we did save towards it but some bad luck meant our savings were affected a few times before we got there.

We could have saved harder but it was a balance between paying for cheaper local things much more frequently and a big one of trip. When they were younger the everyday stuff was more important for them as they aged and remembered more the balance changed.

When that changed we did go - we think we hit the age about right.

Our poor finances didn't change the importance we attached as parents wanting to do it with our DC first. If we could never have done it ever we would have reconsidered but few years - why not take the time and have the patience wait to enjoy the much long for and wanted experience.

I'm having a hard time with people assuming transport is free or cheap or not necessary to beaches because they live on cheap routes or right next to beaches or drive and ignore the costs they do end up paying.

I honestly have no idea how much it costs with public transport to a beach. I know it costs £1.90 to use 1 bus just to get into my City Centre. A trip which takes 10 minutes. So I can't imagine it being cheap to travel far to the coast.

It tends to cost me about £25-£30 in petrol when I have drove to the coast, and I live in the Midlands. So it isn't exactly free or cheap, I get that and how it can be hard. But, I just don't get why anyone would refuse a GP to take their child instead. Especially at 3 years old. It WOULD do the child the world of good because they would have a blast there (who doesn't?) and, as my dear old Nan always says, the fresh sea air does you the power of good. (not entirely sure what amount of truth is in that statement, but I did used to sleep well on the night at least!)

I couldn't tell you why we were so attached to idea of beach and holiday with just us and us going first I do remember it being very important to us - best thing GP did though was to wait for us to get on with it and get over it then join next visit.

I wouldn't bat an eye lid now if they wanted to take them without us and we welcome them coming along.

I don't think its uncommon to have odd few things as parents you get precious about or look forward to you doing with them. When its everything I think it gets very weird.

usualsuspects

"All DILS think they are normal too.

I expect it works both ways."

Fluffyraggies

"Of course it works both ways.

But the GPs arn't the ones trying to come to a decision.

We're discussing why it is that some parents decide not to let their DCs stay in the care of someone else over night. Be they GPs/Aunts & Uncles/whoever."

Absoluty Fluffy,

Its not just about saefty and all the rest but also " values".

Personally, as said before after 4.5 years of really not bonding or showing my DD a good time or anything really, except washing her the second she goes onto the hallowed ground, and chasing after her going " oooo oooo ooo " all the time when she might actually " touch" one the very precious surfaces in the house...I have decided enough is enough, I never had anything to compare her reacton to staying there before too - .....but coming back from PILS, subdued, quiet etc and coming back from DB's on a high, chatty normal bouncing around....says it all.

Unlike some of the others here - I did let my baby go there and when she was a year and after that she has stayed there alot.....so we did try it - and we werent precious about it...

I am sure I am very eccentric in other areas of my life - but I know that 100% I NEVER want my daughter to feel subordinate to a carpet, table cloth etc...as far as I am aware - my DD has NEVEr broken or damaged anything precious in thier home and certainly hasnt in ours.

I think I would have been so much more happy with DD going there if they had offered to take her to places like the beach, farms, indoor play centers...the furthest my poor DD got was costco and the same play park over and over again and yes - they could have well afforded to take her to anywhere they wanted to and spoil her but they didnt!

I guess the thread has moved miles away from the OP now, with all the talk of "firsts" and how long it takes or how much it costs to get to the beach...

However I still hold that the absolute key thing relevant to whether a grandparent has a grandchild overnight or not is whether that grandparent is trustworthy. It is absolutely irrelvant that seeker and usualsuspect are responsible grandparents if the grandparent in your particular case is not, nor whther the grandparents are father's parents or mothers, and 99% of people are not bothered about whether the grandparents over indulge their child food-wise if it is occassional, but it is a sad but true fact that some grand parents think they are still capable of appropriately caring for a 3 year old when they are no longer (whether physically or mentally or both) capable of that task.

The OP has not been back since the beginning of this thread, but I can well imagine a grandmother like my own mother posting this OP, without mentioning that she has repeatedly done things that are very real and not normal dangers to her grandchildren, and that she is no longer as "switched on" as she once (maybe) was. She undoubtedly doesn't recognise in herself that making a 3 year old walk on the road, driving around with a 5 year old in car seat which is not actually strapped down, leaving a 10 month old alone in a room in a wooden rocker without harness, fiddling with her camera to get the right setting while a toddler wanders down to a river, blaming a 4 year old because he wasn't watching his 2 year old brother while they were gardening in another part of an acre of garden, who then fell in a stream (alarm raised by said 4 year old or nobody would have known til too late) are not normal or acceptable behaviours from somebody in loco-parentis.... She may well complain to her friends that I won't leave my kids with her, but I won't - until or for any longer than I'd happily leave them on their own, as that's how safe I feel they are!

All the "firsts" stuff is a red herring, we have no way of knowing what the grandparents in question are like, as the OP has not been back and says she is not even the grandparent herself, and whether the child would be safe and happy with them (as mine are with my in-laws) or not (as mine wouldn't be with my possibly well intentioned but utterly unreliable, physically challenged due to age related conditions, and tbh utterly self absorbed parents)

op has been back cant remeber which page! op said she is fine and has no problems, people replied and said - yes but who does admit that....

my PILs think they are normal, read above!

EGO.

My own poor DF is disbabled and I cant let him push DD out - he has no real idea of his limiations! HOwever, he has never complained to me that he has never taken her out by himself for a walk or been by himself with her at all....

PILs on the other hand - who have had her on a regular basis!!!!! DIFFERENT STORY....thats suddenly all sorts of things!

OP was back very close to the start of the thread, on page 2 or 3, only once and not since, unless I have missed something. Grandparents "rights" threads are annoying as like it or not they don't have "rights" - some are wonderful and deserve respect and lots of time with grandchildren. some are uninterested or there has been some big fight, some think they are wonderful but aren't, whether for reasons they can't help or otherwise!

Grandparents are as different as are parents or children, and the fact somebody is a grandparent does not in itself tell us that much about the individual in question (are they 43 or 83 or at what point between? Are they physically fit or not, what about mentally?) nor does it give them a right to anything, or exclude them from anything, so when people jump in and say others are ungrateful or precious and depriving their kids of precious memories if they don't hand them over, without knowing the circumstances, it is IMO crazy and ill thought out... Some grandparents or near grand parents jump onto these threads full of sarcasm or bitterness, forgetting they themselves may well be nothing at all like the grandparent in the OP, and defending somebody on the basis they had a child who had a child is a little like claiming all parents are brilliant and faultless, or all aunts/ uncles/ siblings etc. etc...

of course english, most people also post on the basis of a small sample of thier own experience.

my mum is great so how could anyone else stop thier child from benefitting.

Persoanlly i do think some parents have gone totally mad on GP giving odd treat - or once in 6 months ruining routine in some way....

but usually the PILS/GP being complained about - are toxic in some way....

OP was back a few threads back.

few pages back I mean.

a) your son needs to grow a pair and not be such a wimp - presumably he does have a view?

b) 3 is awfully young

c) I would not be happy with anyone taking my children to the beach when they were cery young. I know how they react/are likely to run off/fall over/have selective deafness etc - others are less likely to. Are you sure it is not this that is the problem?

Found the reply, 8 pages back, and see where the beach obsession came from . Still hold with what I said though :) I think the DIL /MIL thing is a red herring too; does the DIL's own mother have the grandchild over night? If so then there may be cause to wonder why the MIL isn't "allowed" to, but if not ten the DIL is not comfortable with the child being away over night at such a young age, and the MIL should not be taking it so personally. As has been said, asserting that you have "no peculiarities" is fairly meaningless, I doubt many peculiar/ unreliable etc. people would see themselves that way - although equally the OP may be absolutely 100% suitable to care for a small child, there is no way of knowing, and no solid ground to declare the DIL a precious or over protective misery on the basis of the grandparents' post tbh!

My poor mum didn't realise how deaf she was, I was petrified whenever she took DD out and made sure I walked the routes with her and pointed out the best places to cross roads - tactfully telling her "this is where I always cross as you can see the traffic both ways..."

When DD was a baby I would walk into the room and find her dropping off to sleep with DD sliding off her lap. She didn't always realise she was falling asleep, or even that she had been asleep.

We managed, but it was really difficult. I loved my mum dearly, and she had no "peculiarities" either!

I'm sure there are very good reasons why the DIL is refusing overnight visits. Frankly, whatever the reason it's the parents who decide. It's hardly the kind of thing you would do maliciously especially if the relationship is otherwise ok.

Well said English, Eliza and Olgaga. My DF would assert that he has no peculiarities or health problems, when in actual fact he's a danger on the road due to poor eye sight ( he's reluctantly given up driving), he has days he can hardly walk due to arthritis, he struggles for breath due to heart problems. It would be cruel to point all this out to him as a reason not to let him look after gc alone! But no way will I risk dc or his or anyone else's safety knowingly, so when he's asked to look after gc I stay with them too.

He will never admit to being tired either, when he's actually shattered and needs about 12 hours sleep each night, so I know its not fair to stay the night with dc as dc gets up early and would probably wake him.

Two points. I wondered what possible rational reason there could be for a willing child to spend the night with her grandparents if the grandparents concerned are normal, healthy, non smoking non drinking non criminal non stupid adult human beings with functioning brains. No reply to the question. Only lots of stories about grandparents who are obviously none of the above!

Oh and I am nowhere near being a grandparent, or a mil! Interesting- and a little sad - that people think that I must be, because I don't necessarily take the dil's side automatically!