in wanting my unreasonableness accommodated?

[TheLittlestSprout]

I know I'm being unreasonable but given the circumstances want this to be accommodated. AIBU?

I live abroad and get to travel home once a year. Last year I didn't as I was heavily pregnant so when I go in a few weeks it will be the first time I've seen my parents for 2 years and the first time any of my family have met my son.

I normally stay with my parents. My sister lives nearby and visits them several times a week with her 4 kids and their large, friendly bouncy dog. I want my sister to leave her dog at her house for the week I'm staying. My sister is throwing a strop and refusing to do this and my parents are saying they don't want to get drawn in, which feels like they're prioritising the dog over their grandson.

I know AIBU however in my defence 2 months ago DS (then 5 months old) was attacked by my fuckwitted ex friends dog. Thankfully he wasn't seriously hurt and his face has almost completely healed now and he seems to be completely over it. Unfortunately I am still totally traumatised. I can feel a panic attack coming on just writing this. I know it wasn't my sister's dog, I know it's unfair to punish him for this other dog's behaviour but I can't stay with DS in a house where there is a dog running free. I just can't. In fact I think I'd rather just cancel and not go at all.

So flame away. I'm being PFB aren't I?

Your sister is wrong and probably acting jealous. It's your instinct to protect your child and given what already happened they should respect that. If the dog can not be in a different secluded area then arrange to visit other friends /family at those times the dog is visiting. Good luck x

Erm, Piper, you seem rather contrary. OP visits rarely so it's no big deal to keep the dog away. Fuck, I put my cats away (or attempt to, it's a bit harder to herd cats) if the meter reader has a conniption about it.

I can think of a better way to reintroduce dogs to both the OP and her son: a nice, calm, friendly dog.

I love bouncy loon dogs a lot personally, but it's a bit much to ask of someone still suffering some amount of trauma.

I'd like to take this opportunity to say that I've noticed most MN dog owners are more sensible than you are. Also, depending on the dog, it may be fine with people it knows, but more excitable around strangers.

OP, YANBU. It's no big deal for your sister to keep the dog away unless she makes it a big deal (which she has).

Am I Piper?

I'm coming from the viewpoint that it's not reasonable to ask everyone else to alter their normal every day behaviour, in order to indulge an irrational fear.
What's not sensible about that?

I doubt this is even about the dog really. There's obviously a lot of tension between the two sisters, and neither is going to want to back down. Both parties need to find a compromise in order to move forward.

I don't understand why your sister isn't more concerned about you feeling ok. She should be supporting you after such a scare.

I agree midnite - both sisters are competing to be top dog here. Both want their wishes to be paramount. Both are being unyielding and selfish and looking to their parents to choose themselves over the other.

One wants to be awarded special circumstances, and the other wants to not have to go out of their way to accomodate them.

Stalemate.

It's an unpopluar opinion I know, but as the OP's fear over the dog IS unfounded, I think she should be the one to back down.

But panic is very distressing. If you read the first post, you can see that she is experiencing distress. It's not about protecting a child. It's about managing fear. A dog in close quarters when you are feeling traumatised about dogs has to be managed. What I want to know is does the sister know?

Bullshit pictish

Every dog that attacked a child had a 'first time' and presumably the majority were thought to be friendly pets before they attacked. Including the one that attacked the OP's DS.

The parents are endangering the child. Any dog can turn aggressive.

Nkf - I agree. Panic is distressing, yes.

What if the sister backs down on this occasion, and the OP's distress never abates? Then every time the OP visits, rare though it is, she has established control over the daily goings on that occur in their normal lives, while she is there, owing to her ongoing irrational fear.
So each infrequent visit thereafter requires the parents and the sister to back down and pay homage to the OP's demands. It is entirely possible that if she gets her way once, she will expect it ever after.

Is that reasonable? Some may think it is...but I have to say that on balance, I wouldn't agree.

I am not without sympathy for the OP, but if it were me in her position I would view it as my problem, and not endeavour to make it everyone else's as well. Maybe I'm unusual in that, I don't know.

So Juno - how do you propose OP proceed? By avoiding all dogs, everywhere forever?
Tricky.

She hardly ever visits. Once a year or so and only for a week. And the attack is recent. Next year, she'll probably feel differently. Panic attacks aren't always permanent. If my sister told me she was panicking about dogs due to a vey recent attack on her baby, then I'd leave my dog at home. But then I don't have a dog. And dog ownership seems to make some people irrational. And unfortunately that irrationality does seem to be permanent.

Butt. I'm not interested in a slanging march here. The op asked if we thought she was being unreasonable and I think she is. However :-

I did not say in my post I was a dog owner. As it happens I am, ironically of a Border Collie. I do not take my dog everywhere, if there is somebody scared of dogs I will keep my dog away from them. The child in question has no fear of dogs, this dog has no history, the fear is that of an adult who admits it is irrational. Oh and by the way, you are in no position to comment on how I care for my dog.

I have also been the victim of 2 dog attacks, one as a child (which has left me with facial scarring) and one as an adult. The actions of my mother who made sure I still spent time with dogs ensured that I found them a pleasure to be around and not be the victim of a debilitating fear.

The parents are NOT endangering the child btw. Don't be so bloody dramatic.
You could apply that stance to anything and everything in that case. Don't get in a car - someone might crash into you. Don't eat a banana - you might choke to death. Don't go out in the snow - you might slip and bang your head. Etc etc etc.

The OP would do better to rationalise than indulge her fear. If she can't, then that's a shame, but it's not down to everyone else to compromise to accomodate it.
I'm sorry, but that's how I see it.

Oh and everything Pictish just said.

I think yabu. There's no reason to think this dog is a threat to your baby. Many babies have been accidently injured by other children, should your nieces and nephews not be allowed to come either?

You know you are being irrational, but you want your family to alter their normal pattern of behaviour, even though you know there's not really a need to. It sounds a bit like you want some concrete proof of your family's love.

It's not about protecting the baby. It's about the OP's feelings. And she admits they are irrational. But irrational feelings are real. She is upset. Her baby was attcked. She feels panicked aroudn dogs at the moment.. If I were here sister and knew she was feeling like this, I would cut her some slack.

The dog can stay home this week. And the dog owner can hug her sister and say she hopes she gets over the fear and what a horrible thing to happen.

I agree it would be nice if her sister were to cut her some slack, but unfortunately it's not something the OP can insist on.

I would feel the same if someone had bitten my baby's face, your feelings are entirely natural. The problem is with with your selfish sister who insists on taking her dog with her regardless of anybody else's feelings. It's not about the dog, it's about her expecting everything to revolve around her, a normal person would understand and respect your fears. I wouldn't go or would stay at a b&b making it very clear that you will leave the second your sister turns up with her dog. If your parents want to see you and your kid, they'll accommodate, if not, they won't in which case, why bother?

Oh and a big thumbs up to those on this thread telling the OP that she is nbu, and that her baby is in danger from the bloody dog. Way to go to allay her fears folks. Jolly well done. You all helped loads.

I'm coming from the viewpoint that it's not reasonable to ask everyone else to alter their normal every day behaviour, in order to indulge an irrational fear. What's not sensible about that?

In this case, the dog doesn't reside at the house in question, and has no real reason to be there, other than the sister wants to bring him. Maybe the OP's fear is irrational, but it's ok to have an irrational fear. The dog gets to visit 51 other weeks a year, apparently, why can't he have a week off for the OP's peace of mind?

But her baby wasn't in a car crash, and didn't choke on a banana.

If he had, I would also find it entirely reasonable that she might want not take him on car journeys or feed him bananas.

Dogs can be dangerous. They can, and do, attack. It's also perfectly easy to avoids dogs for the rest of your life; not everyone is a bloody dog lover. Plenty of people choose to avoid dogs. You might see them out in the street, but you absolutely do not have to have any direct involvement with them.

No one said her baby was in danger, for god sake.

But she is not being unreasonable. And she is not wrong to want to keep her baby away from the very same thing that recently hurt it.

And anyone who thinks she is BU, is probably the kind of person that thinks dogs are 'family members'.

Some of you seem to be completely lacking in empathy. The OP hasn't seen her parents in 2 years and the parents haven't even met their grandchild.

I don't suppose for one minute the baby would be in danger because the OP will make sure of that. However, I don't think it is at all an unreasonable request to ask that the dog be kept away from the house. If the sister lives in the same village why doesn't she leave the dog at home anyway? It isn't as if it is left for hours on end.

I stated in an earlier post that I know loads of people with dogs and they never take them when visiting other people's houses.

I agree with bunbaker, it's really not a big thing to ask.

I'm sure OP knows that this is an issue of hers that will need to be dealt with over time, but really being in confined spaces with a big dog maybe too much too soon.