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?

And I still maintain that the majority of 50 year olds are not old.

Maybe you should read all what I posted here TheBigJessie before you assume what I have been saying.

Oh I took that as to me.

What age is retirement btw? You cannot call people old when they work full time. My auntie is 52 and works long hard shifts as a nurse, maybe shes incapable of nursing because after all she should be in a nursing home.

TheBigJessie obviously a director or CEO is not representative of the entire population - it was an example of people in their 50s who have a much more stressful and challenging job than that of looking after a three year old for the evening. There are also many builders, nurses, teachers, bin men, shift workers etc who are not BUPA subscribed who work long hours until they retire and they are representative of that age demagraphic. If they can do that 5 days a week then their energy levels and health would make then as capable as anyone of looking after a young child. My actual point is that people are living longer and are therefore no 'old' in their 50s and early 60s and must healthier than twenty years ago.

Apparently the first person who will live to 200 has already been born. Comparing that to being old at 50 LOL.

When did the grandmother of a 3 year old automatically become a 50 year old? Lots of grandparents of 3 year olds are a lot older than 50, and not all 50 (or 30, 40, 60, or 70) year olds are the same...

My in-laws are roughly the same ages as my parents, but my in-laws are in vastly better shape and are very much capable of looking after my 3 young children, whereas my own parents most definitely are not (all grandparents are in their mid 60s).

DH and I are each the eldest child of several in our respective families, by the time our youngest siblings have 3 year olds, if they have children, our parents are likely to be in their 70s...

When I am 50 my youngest will have just turned 15, and hopefully not father to a 3 year old, so I think the 50 year old benchmark as typical age for a grandparent to a 3 year old is less and less typical these days...

Also my father has chosen to continue to work after official retirement age and has a very high status and highly paid job - he sits down all the time and has people to fetch and carry for him, he is capable of his job, but he is not capable of looking after a 3 year old (not that he'd want to either tbh). He is not a CEO, but the fact typical CEOs in their 50 or 60s is another irrelevant tangent IMO.

usualsuspect indeed you may. As I think I suggested a few pages ago. You could both actually have different experiences. Buy hey, this is MN, so not a popular idea.

brandy so you have no personal investment in this outrage at the idea that anyone anywhere might be 50 and incapable of looking after a young child?

surely age ability skill ect dont really matter very much what does matter is how the parents of the child feel about that suituation.

Seriously, how much more hyperbole and strawmen have you got, brandy? Was it you who claimed that Silky wanted to take away deaf parents' children, too?

TheBigJessie I would say if at 50 you were not capable of looking after a 3yo it would be because of disability or mental health problems not being old.

TheBigJessie I asked Silky how she thought deaf parents coped since her mum apparently couldnt cope due to deafness. One of my friends mum is deaf and managed perfectly fine to bring up her children without harm so no I do not understand being deaf as a reason. Your point being?

Quite probably, yes. Diabilities caused by age, perhaps, like we're been discussing for the last week (well, it seems like it) on this thread, perhaps?

People age differently. My mother has severe osteoporosis. She wasn't born with it. She was not in an industrial accident. She is unlucky and has aged faster in some ways than others in her generation.

The point being that you deliberately missed the point then, and posted a dramatic accusation.

So if I came on MN and said all the 30 year olds I know are too young to have children , no one on MN would react?

Yeah OK then.

but nobody actually said that about 50 year olds did they

raspberry lol

Although I donn't even want anyone to say "all over fifties are old and doddery"!

Perhaps the key is strawmen? Oy you lot! Why do you want all under 70's with age-related illnesses to go and work in the mines?

Yes she did actually.

No you want people to be able to generalise all over MN and everyone to just nod and agree.

Just to put the cat among the pigeons, my lovely gynaecologist who must be at least mid 60s, told me last time I saw him that if my blood pressure stayed as low as it is and if I had good brisk walk every day, I'd live to be at least a hundred and two. He also told me there was a rash of activity in std clinics amongst the over 50's who when faced with big life changes like divorce or bereavement were whooping it up nowadays because generally they look better and are in better health than they would have been a few generations ago and are no longer content to turns into widows in their weeds . So there.

No, usual. Whoever it was said that all the 50-60 year olds she knew were slowing down. I don't think she even said they were all incapable of overnight babysitting!

Furthermore, it wasn't a generalisation. If she'd said "all fifty year olds everywhere slow down" it would be a generalisation. Similarly, "all thirty year olds I know are too young to have children" is not a generalisation. "Everyone on Stanley Street has a garden" wouldn't be a generalisation. "Everyone in the UK has a garden" would be a generalisation. Get my point?

I'm objecting to generalisations. Specifically, the one that says that all fifty years olds are hale and hearty because some in this thread are.

Are you usually so condescending?

Anyway I'm outta this thread now. I'm sure Country File must be on.