To be annoyed lunch was so late

[happygonicky]

Big family lunch at in-laws, have very good-natured toddler who generally eats lunch at 12, naps about 1.30.No major drama if it's bit late, but DH asked his mother if lunch could be served 12ish so toddler wouldn't get too hungry and tired. This was agreed. Because of our hours, not many of our meals are eaten together, so make a point of trying to eat together.

Day of lunch, as we get there at 11.30, lunch is being put into oven. It's a roast so will take 2 hrs. I had brought snacks but not a proper meal because I thought we'd be eating early enough not to need one. Didn't eat till 2, toddler went beyond point of being able to eat, cried a lot, I wasn't able to eat my dinner and we had to leave.

At the time, I just thought, meals can take longer to get on table, especially when hosting, but DH's mother has probably cooked more roasts than I've eaten and use to cook professionally. She knew we'd be eating late. I don't know if it was just thoughtless or, more likely, she didn't like us requesting an early lunch and decided to do it her way. If I'd known, I could have prepared for it. AIBU to be really cross about this. It ruined an important occasion.

I've been burned by this before. My Mil is very lax with timings and family meals are always later than scheduled. I know now to always bring a meal for dd to eat at a time that suits her, and then the adults eat when the food is ready. If I don't manage this, I will just ask mil if I can use some of her eggs and whip up an omelette for dd.

YANBU to be a bit miffed that she didn't just let you know. If she doesn't want lunch at 12, it's her house and her perrigative to do it whenever she likes, BUT she should have just said that up front, and not agreed to your timing suggestion then?!
However, I wouldn't mention it to her, just take it as a life lesson, and make sure next time you go, you take something for your dc, regardless of what time mil says the meal will be. At least then you'll never be caught out with a hungry screaming child.
She may or may not have done it maliciously to make a point about you trying to dictate mealtimes, but either way, rise above, and make sure you can feed your child when you need to. She surely won't be able to say anything about that?

I agree with the others I'm afraid.

Who eats a roast at 12?

You knew the roast was going in at 11.30, so why didn't you feed your toddler then instead of making him/her wait?

The whole world can't fit around a toddler.
Even with older children and a MIL who tends to always run late with food I would give a hefty brunch at 11am.

the point is, the OP made a request which her MIL agreed to, then didn't stick to. Whether you think it reasonable to make the request in the first place is neither here nor there, you don't agree to do lunch for around 12 and then proceed to dish up 2 hours later. Yes, the OP (or her DH) could have done a sarnie or whatever, but the MIL was being VU in her actions.

Roast at 12 here so I know where you're coming from OP. My tongue would be hanging out if I had to wait till 2 if it was expected at 12. If I was visiting somebody who eats later than me I would feed us all something to tide us over first. Especially when breakfast is at 8am.

I agree with taking a packed lunch next time for the bairn.

oh and to head it off before it happens, every year, there's lots of threads on the run upto Christmas with people who's DCs can not wait until 2pm to eat a meal, but who's parents/PIL want to do Christmas dinner then, the angst about "well if I feed them at 12 they won't be hungry again for a second lunch, but MIL will want them to sit at the table and how do I keep them still when not interested in eating?" threads.

The solution is always to push the chirstmas lunch until 4pm - 5ish and have it as an early tea for the children, really late lunch for the adults.

Honestly, if anyone says "christmas is all about the children" ask them what time they eat the main meal, you can normally see if they really think it's a day for 'children' and 'family' or for the adults.

we eat roasts between 12-1pm most weeks, get back from family service at church at 10:30, bung it in the oven then, ready around 12:30 depending on the size of the roast. You don't have to prep it at breakfast unless you are cooking half a cow.

I doubt the MIL did it to be a nasty old cow.

how large a party was it? Cooking for a lot of people is a right bloody pain. I've lost count of the number of times we've sat down to our '2pm, absolutely definitely 2pm' Christmas lunch at 6pm.

Hang on a minute, the OP did not expect her MIL to serve lunch early. Her DH only asked & MIL said it wouldn't be a problem. In those circumstances I don't think she is being unreasonable to think lunch would have been served at 12 - or fairly close to it.

It would have been a totally different thread if OP had come on and said "AIBU to be angry that MIL refused to serve lunch early for my toddler?". If she had actually said "no" when asked then that would, obviously, have been fine & OP would have been able to take something else for her DC and plan a nap around it.

Personally, I wouldn't have asked BUT OP (well her DH) wasn't wrong for doing so - it is his mum after all!

Once 12 was agreed, it was rude of MIL to continue to plan lunch for 2pm without telling you, so in that respect YANBU.

I think it was a bit rude to ask that a big lunch be served at a time that most people would find too early specifically to suit your toddler. In that situation I would have asked what time lunch was likely to be so that I could plan accordingly.

However given that you did ask, and your MIL agreed (presuming that there was no misunderstanding) then it was rude of her to then go ahead and serve the meal much later without at least warning you first.

But given that she did do that, I don't understand why you didn't simply say 'Oh DC can't wait that long to eat, I'll make him a sandwich' and solve the problem that way.

All in all everyone was a bit crap really.

It is annoying that she agreed you'd eat at 12 and then changed timings without letting you know in advance. But, really, if you knew at 11.30 that you weren't going to be eating for a significant time, why didn't you just give the toddler a sandwich and put her down for a nap?

When our dcs were little, we used to have Xmas dinner after they had gone to bed. A lovely grown up meal with lots of wine and fizz about 7.30pm. Toddlers don't give a toss about Xmas dinner and eating with them is not relaxing or sophisticated.

I never understand posts like this. Why should you do dictact what time lunch is served? I couldn't eat at 12 in all honesty. Give the kid a sandwich or some fruit to put it on until lunch is served. Really no big deal

"I'm slightly puzzled. Did all the adults just spend 2 -3hrs watching toddler get more hungry, whinny and tired?"

This was my thought as well?

In my mind it should have never turned into an issue as I'd have fed my grumpy toddler - even if I'd had to go to the shops to buy food to do so!!

If you asked for an early lunch and she agreed to it, YANBU.

She is the problem here, if she had just said no you could have prepared.

Why didn't you all just talk to one another at the time? "Oh MIL, the roast is just going in, dd will be shattered and starving if she has to wait two hours" MIL "Oh sorry, ds asked for us to eat at noon, I totally forgot/got up too late. Why doesn't you go over to the breadbin and make dd a sandwich?"

Sorted

You knew when she put the roast on how long it would take... Why didn't you make something for your toddler at that point; instead of letting it all happen and whining about it afterwards????

That's what I don't understand, given mil had changed her mind for whatever reason and dinner was going to be late, why didn't the op just make the toddler some lunch rather than making the poor thing wait till 2pm, miss their nap and it get to the point where they all had to leave? Surely there was bread and butter in mils house?

Wonder what the other guests thought?

Why didn't you give your toddler a sandwich nand nap?

That's bonkers! You sound high maintenance op, sorry

"If you asked for an early lunch and she agreed to it, YANBU"

In this respect no the OP wasn't being unreasonable

However the OP then goes on to say this:

"Didn't eat till 2, toddler went beyond point of being able to eat, cried a lot, I wasn't able to eat my dinner and we had to leave"

Which leaves me - and plenty of others - wondering why no-one fed the poor child. That way child would have been fine, Mum could have eaten her dinner and no harm down?

Instead it sounds as though they decided to make the hungry child wait for 2 hours to eat as well?

Did you not give her any lunch to prove a point?
I just can't understand why as a parent you wouldn't make her a sandwich or some fruit rather then let her starve.
It was ridiculous of you to even ask lunch to be early. Adults don't reAlly eat at 12. So did you expect everyone to revolve around your dd. You had options.

Ha ha ha ha...you actually expected a whole family to have a roast dinner at 12 to fit in with a toddler ? And why if you knew your toddler would get cranky did you not feed them before ?

This is a get a grip moment

Thanks for all the replies! Interesting to get a different perspective. We never usually make requests like this on behalf of toddler, she very much goes with the flow, it's just we realised how often she's eating alone and wanted to include her in family meal. Probably where we went wrong. What happened was she was perfectly happy, was eating loads of crisps, then came to sit down and couldn't eat. Too full of crisps (and snacks I'd given her in car) and too tired! Also, I didn't really register that the meal was actually going in so late when I saw it. Which I know sounds mad but it wasn't until I thought about it afterwards that I realised it was always going to be a lot later. I was busy chatting and catching up with relatives and the time passed, it wasn't until toddler got upset at table that I realised quite how late it had got. In fairness, MIL had offered my husband to make her something but he just thought the meal would be ready a little bit later than planned, which wouldn't have been a problem.

If it was a one-off, I wouldn't have thought more of it. I just feel it was deliberately done and it ruined the lunch. I'd definitely take lunch for her next time and sit with her. That too would probably have seemed a bit weird though. And they all made comments about how many crisps she'd eaten!

thing is, when you are at someone's house who's cooking for you, when they aren't your parents esp, it doesn't seem polite to go into the kitchen and question when they are going to serve and ask for something else for your child, there's always the fear of making a fuss - and the hope that with all the excitment your DCs will keep going and be ok, even though you really know they won't.

OP, next time really don't worry about being rude, just always take a packed lunch with you, ask what time food will be ready, if it doesn't suit, or you get fobbed off with "oh, not long" when you think it only went in the oven a short while ago, just feed your DCs quietly the food you brought.

Most importantly, you know your child, don't worry about making a fuss, it's always better to be seen as a slightly precious parent than to 'go with the flow' and have the child screaming the place down and ruining it for everyone else.

Being unflexible about mealtimes should be outgrown by 4, then apparently restarts around 50...

I'm bemused by the posters who think that asking family if a meal could be served at a certain time, to suit their grandchild, constitutes demanding that the whole world revolve around said child. Just to clarify, the OP isn't asking that the international jeffing date line be moved - she's just trying to feed her kid, who the family presumably want to see for lunch, at a reasonable time. And the MIL apparently agreed to that. Frankly, I'd be a bit annoyed that she then went back on it, too!