To want nothing more to do with MIL?

[1026mistakes]

I need some perspective on this, I'm a regular poster but name changed because this makes me quite identifiable. Apologies if its long, please bear with me.

About 10 years ago, before me and DH got together, his brother (so my now BIL) was arrested for downloading an indecent image of a child. He said he hadn't meant to, got a caution and nothing more was said. We got a phonecall in April this year, when DC3 was only a few days old, from social services wanting to know if BIL has any contact with our DCs. We said no, he's not that close to DH so he never comes round and MIL comes to us to visit (he still lives at home with MIL). They told us that he'd been arrested again for the same thing as before, the woman we spoke to was obviously surprised that we hadn't been told by MIL as we live literally just around the corner so there was always potential for him to see the DCs. DH phoned MIL to ask what was going on, she said that yes he'd been arrested again but that she didn't tell us because obviously he hadn't meant to do it and wasn't a threat to our DCs. She also told DH not to tell me (though he has already), making it pretty obvious she didn't trust me not to tell anyone. MIL told us it was one image and that his computer hasn't been seized.

Since then she's made it clear that he's done nothing wrong and she doesn't want to talk about it, she only told us he'd appeared at Magistrates court afterwards, and that it had been referred to crown court. She told us on Thursday afternoon that he would be at crown court on Friday and that he'd only just found out, I don't believe he would have found out at that short notice. I also found out by looking online that he was in court for sentencing, again she didn't tell us. He got a suspended sentence, as far as MIL was concerned yesterday that was the end of the matter and he'd done nothing wrong and no one would ever find out.

DH bought the local paper on his way to work this morning just in case. On page 15 there's a big piece that says his name, age and address. It also says that police seized two computers, and found over 1000 images ranging in seriousness from levels 1-5 (5 being the most graphic and severe there is), plus videos as well. DH has phoned MIL again, even today she's still insisting he hasn't done anything wrong. DH is happy to want nothing more to do with BIL, but where MIL is concerned he said he can't choose his family, and I do understand that she's still his mum but she's made it very clear where her loyalties lie.

AIBU to tell DH that he's welcome to see her if he wishes but given how she feels about what BIL is and has done that I want nothing to do with her? Should also add that we've both already agreed our DCs will never go to her house while BIL lives there.

Contacting the MAPPA is a good idea, there will be an assessment of whether BIL is likely to reoffend and whether he is a threat to children (in and out of the family) in terms of escalating behaviour. They should be able to give you details of his SOPO and it is likely that will include contact with children and restrictions on his movements around leisure and play facilities and schools. As well as the restrictions on internet access.

However, some offenders do not accept that what they have done is wrong and do not abide by the terms of the SOPO. I would imagine that if MIL is denying the behaviour then it is extremely likely that he is.

You are absolutely not being the slightest bit unreasonable here.

I have a feeling that MIL isn't going to really "get it" though. Prepare to be the evil DIL.

I'm really aware that abuse happens in all sorts of families. I think neglect and sexual abuse is something that happens in middle class families too. (There can be emotional neglect when professional parents are preoccupied with work etc. This can make the children more vulnerable It's not just about abusers targeting kids who are materially deprived.)

This might be a bit of a tangent, but there have been suggestions that moving away solves the problem. I can see why in some really difficult family situation people want to put many miles between themselves and relatives whose behaviour has made their lives difficult. The hard thing for the Original Poster is to work out what the proportionate response is in this very upsetting situation.

I have spent several years working on a phoneline supporting survivors of sexual abuse. It means my perspective is a bit different from someone whose main knowledge comes from news headlines, tabloid press etc.

A piece of training that really stuck with me was from somebody who had experienced sexual abuse as a child. They said was that the worst consequence was not the physical acts themselves but the sense that boundaries and trust had been destroyed.

I am not sure how I would feel as a child if my parents suddenly moved me away from my friends, my school, a whole community. (A planned move which involved a better job would be more explicable.) How would such a move be explained away? What if children subsequently found out the real reason? The internet means it's a lot less easy to start a new life than it used to be. And some people will assume that a move might be the result of having been in some way involved in the criminal behaviour of somebody in the family.

The awful truth is that we can never keep our children completely safe. Any new area will contain people who have an inappropriate interest in children. It's also pretty impossible to shield children from all inappropriate images. (Most children have access to iPads and mobiles, and not every device will have filters.)

I'm sorry, but it seems to be me who's the first to say this, but

First off, please look up some statistics online (child "porn" (yes, I heard all the stuff), levels (what I learned - TODAY - about levels 4 and 5 made my blood run cold)).

Read everything you can - ignorance is a luxury nobody can afford at this juncture), Gather this information and FORCE it onto your MIL, including the concept that you can muck about on the internet for decades and not just "stumble across" any of this, let alone the really bad stuff.

Her reaction will be interesting$, but that's not the main thing you need to think about.

What is, is this: Statistically speaking, child abusers are not born, they're made. And in the vast majority of cases, it's a family member.

You have said nothing about FIL - is he perhaps not on the scene any more? Whether dead or divorced, perhaps his presence is no longer an issue. And even if it was him [and he's no longer in the picture] you may not be home&dry, you've still got your MIL's minimising$ to deal with.

$because: that's the easiest scenario; I'm sorry, it's not always the father, sometimes it's the mother.

And, I'm further sorry, but in an abuse situation, it's almost never one child and not the other(s).

To ratchet if back a bit, even if your DH was abused it's not necessarily the case that he'd 'deal with it' the way your BIL did - indeed, DP and I were thrilled to bits that DH has not just given up information that MIL specifically asked him to keep from you (i.e. he that he has broken the "code"), but that he has also volunteered the newspaper information. OK, rational people will say that you'll just pick up a paper anyway, but that's the point - your DH seems to be rational.

Finally, to those who are all "ooh, she's just coming to terms with this", she's have TEN F*ING YEARS BETWEEN THE PREVIOUS CAUTION AND NOW to come to terms with it, and has not. Indeed - given that there is no such thing a trial that has just sprung up overnight - she would have had at least months to deal with things.

If she's been given the truth about anything. That said, there's that thing about the specific-police/social worker that makes me wonder.

On a more practical note, I agree that if you possibly can, you should move and maybe even change your name (hey, why not change it to yours?).

Please, look after yourself and your DCs.

holidays, level 5 doesn't necessarily mean prison, no. Quite a few cases do not result in prison, as various programmes can be attached to suspended prison sentences in order to try to prevent furniture offending, which a prion sentence would not necessarily do.
OP, mobile phone thing usually relates to not using a phone capable of accessing the Internet. Sometimes relates to phones capable of taking images too. Would need to check his precise terms though. If he was using one in the pub last night, then that could be a breach, depending on the terms and the type of phone.

FIL died years ago. I know he used to physically abuse DH, apparently MIL didn't and still doesn't know. DH says BIL was the golden child who could do no wrong even from an early age, whereas DH was always told by FIL how much he was hated. That's all I know tbh, he died before we got together and DH (understandably) rarely talks about him.

Oh that's desperately sad. Just to repeat there are phonelines for those who have been abused in childhood and which support partners of survivors. (Survivors UK is one.) Perhaps this is not only about protecting a new generation of children, but also about what this crime has stirred up about your partner's own childhood and past.

OK, so, you know about the golden child thing - I'm sure you get that DH needs to know about this, too (and could explain about his lack of "toeing the party line" thing) - very happy to hear that.

Hope all else is well...

{hugs}

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Children_Act_1978

Level 5-sadism and bestiality

Your MIL must be deluded

Please keep your children away.

Hugs to you,your DH and DC

Having clicked that wiki link i'm actually horrified almost more by level 2. So one of the most tame (relatively) type of images is of sexual activity between children or solo masturbation but a child

Just fucking awful.

Show those definitions to your mil and ask her if she still thinks what bil has done should be downplayed. Her response should tell you all you need to know as to whether she deserves ongoing contact with your DC.

What a terrible situation. Thinking of you x

Actually, based on the link BaldHedgehog has posted, I retract what said before. No supervised visits, no contact. Anyone who protects someone who behaves in this way should not have any place in your DC's lives. They are potentially very dangerous people.

Yes, it's sad that she has to face the fact her son is a paedophile but, the parents of the children in those pictures have to come to terms with something so much worse. My sympathy lies with them, not someone who enables a covers the tracks of a paedophile.

I don't like the argument that there are lots of other dangers out there. Indeed there are - it doesn't mean you ignore the biggest one in front of your eyes.

Just so we're clear. He has...

Over 1000 images of erotic posing

47 of sexual activity between children / solo masturbation by a child

88 of non penetrative sexual activity between a child and an adult

99 of penetrative sexual activity between a child and an adult

And 5 of sadism / bestiality.

Give mil those facts and some time to think on it. Written down in black and white with a print out of the definitions from wikipedia.

Then ask her that if she is going to down play what he has done why she thinks she should be allowed any contact with your DC.

It may be that she has been sticking her head in the sand and relying on what bil is telling her. And hadn't deliberately misled you. But if this is the case her reaction will tell you. If this is the case I have a lot of sympathy for her because knowing that this is what your son had turned into is awful. I was reading the early parts of this thread looking at my beautiful 7 year old ds and trying to imagine how I'd feel in her shoes and its safe to say the mere second thought of it made me want to vomit.

But if she has deliberately been misleading you, and therefore putting your DC at risk knowing this, I don't think I'd want her to have contact for the foreseeable future.

Yanbu at all.

That is:

Over 1000 images of erotic posing

47 of sexual activity between children / solo masturbation by a child

88 of non penetrative sexual activity between a child and an adult

99 of penetrative sexual activity between a child and an adult

And 5 of sadism / bestiality

No accident. I spend hours each week on the internet and have even looked deliberately at porn from time to time. I have NEVER accidentally found ANY child porn (photographs of child abuse).

Sorry to labour the point. I just want to make it absolutely clear what he has been found guilty of. And how there can be absolutely no misunderstanding here.

Morning.

DH is going round to speak to MIL this afternoon. We have agreed:
-no contact with BIL ever, and no mention of his name in front of the DCs, at least until they're old enough to understand why he has nothing to do with us
-MIL to have no unsupervised contact with the DCs, and they to never set foot in her house while BIL lives there

As far as we're aware she was only told by BIL it was one image, and DH believes that from her reaction when he told her how many there were. So she can still see the DCs at ours providing
-we get a full apology for her choosing to protect him rather than thinking of the safety of her GC.
-I get a full explanation of why she thinks it was acceptable to keep this from me
-she stops making excuses for him, defending him and accepts what he has done

Anymore defending of him and putting him first will prove that she thinks his behaviour is acceptable, and all contact will be ceased. I think that in reality though she must have known he was a danger because she wanted pictures of DS and DD1 when they were born. She never asked for any of DD2, we worked out last night he was arrested while I was pregnant.

That's a good approach 1026mistakes. I am so glad you decided to keep your MIL in your lives, poor woman. Best of luck to you all x

I'm doing it for DH, she's elderly and has health problems, DH says it would break her heart not to see her GC. I'd happily have nothing more to do with her.

I think I'd want nothing more to do with her either tbh but good luck anyway....

Is it possible, then, that she really believed BIL's spin that there was only one image? I suppose that seems reasonable- he is likely to have lied about it and she would have been desperate to believe him. Poor lady, what a shit thing to have to come to terms with.

I think it is highly likely that she had no idea of the extent of it.

Perhaps it's worth asking ourselves what we would do/how we would feel if we found out that one of our adult children possessed/had accessed the sorts of images which the OP's brother-in-law had on his computer?

I think - as some posters above have acknowledged - that's not an easy situation.

If (and I hope it never does happen) it happened to me, I do not think I would easily, instantly. know the right way to act. And perhaps if I'd been married to somebody rather controlling, I would lack confidence in my own judgement?

If other people confronted me with the mistakes I had made, I would hope for a little bit of compassion - even if there was anger too

I also think that your MIL is unlikely to have any idea of the full extent of it. I think the rules you plan to impose are sensible, but do be ready to cease contact altogether if she shows in any way that she is not taking it seriously. Is your DH fully prepared for the fact that this may be necessary? I would guess not yet as it's all so recent. But you will (both) have to constantly reassess.

If she doesn't follow these rules (and trust me, she won't) I hope you're prepared to go over your husband's head and cease contact.

I'd still take the photos. And inform the police he was using the internet at the pub.

I have no MIL, it didn't go well. She is still insisting his innocence, apparently he only accidentally downloaded one video, the reporter made everything else up. She won't apologise because she doesn't think she's done anything wrong