To think that parents in-law should treat their sil/dil the same as their own children

[bookbag40]

I've been quite surprised by a couple of threads on here where parents in-law seems to obviously treat their DIL/SIL differently to their own children.

One where the MIL paid for her SIL to go on holiday with them but not the DIL and one where the MIL spent loads on xmas presents for the son but hardly anything for the DIL.

I find this really hard to understand. My parents have always treated DH as they would their own son. We always get the same things offered to us and the same amount spent on us. I think they would be embarrased to give me say £100 worth of gifts and DH £20 worth. If they said they would pay for me to go on holiday but DH had to pay for himself I would be really offended and we wouldn't go.

My DCs are only little but I certainly plan to treat their spouses as one of the family. It seems horribly excluding not to do so doesn't it?

THE POUINT ABOUT THE PHOTOS WAS THE THE MOTHER IN LAW only BOUGHT PHOTOS OF HER FAMILY AND DIDN'T BUY A SINGLE ONE WITH THE BRIDE IN!!! you've got to ADMIT THAT'S WEIRD??

shit-sorry about the caps

I think it's a shame that, in your family, parents are seen as uncaring if they want to spend some time with their adult children without their partners in tow. I already enjoy spending time with my son when my husband isn't around - it doesn't mean that I don't love my husband, just that the dynamic is different when it is just the two of us. I know that my mum sometimes likes spending time with just me, without my brother around and vice versa, as the conversation is different, the atmosphere is different and there is more opportunity to talk about their shared interests.

In your family, it would seem that this demonstrates a lack of love or affection between those parties, rather than an acknowledgement that the people in a group change the workings of that group. You may think that being part of a family means that you are entitled to join every gathering that family has, but to me, being part of a family means understanding that everyone in that family has their individual relationships with one another as well as as part of the wider group.

I am surprised at your belief that universal inclusion is the only way a family can express love for one another, but if your family are happy to accommodate that, then it's lucky that you have found in-laws who share your views and do not upset you by trying to have independent relationships with their adult children.

Personally, I hope that my son doesn't choose someone like you to spend his life with as I would not like to be in a position whereby I would have to choose between spending any time on my own with him and upsetting someone important to him. I like to think that I would accommodate a partner who would take something like a meal out so personally, but it would break my heart to think that we could never have one-on-one time as mother and son for fear of someone else taking that as a slight on them.

I like spending time with my mum on my own without my dad and sister. I like spending time just with dad, and just with my sister. I also like spending time with everyone, or with two of them. I like spending time with my sisters husband.

But it is different having that one on one time. And if be pissied off if my sister brought her husband along to absolutely everything and I never got any 1-on-1 time with her.

I would then probably speak to my DH and ask that I be invited and then I would expect him to speak up for me and for the fact that I am part of the family.

You sound like a nightmare DiL, possessive and needy.

I can do the odd lunch with my mother but a family lunch means DH is invited.

Yes, I think this is the key. Of course it would be odd to resent the idea of your partner seeing members of his family without you there. But if my PIL organized a family lunch, DH would naturally expect that to include his closest family members, his wife & (leaving aside the issue of adults-only events) his children. Fortunately my PIL assume that too.

To exclude me & my BIL would just seem weird, as if they were trying to recreate the past, when they were a nuclear family, & ignore the fact that their children are now adults with families of their own. And when GC are involved, what then? They're "blood relations" so this hypothetical family lunch would just involve the DIL/SIL being excluded, would it? If so, I'm genuinely surprised that that seems okay to anyone.

And that isn't directed at FrauHelga - everyone seems perfectly happy in her scenario, & in any case I do think the question of when GFs & BFs become recognized as partners & start to integrate with each other's families is usually a gradual process. It's also often connected with the parents' relationship with their own child evolving into a more adult-to-adult one, which can take a long time!

Clearly it would be unrealistic for parents to have to start treating every BF & GF as their child's life partner & to treat them equally with their own child, especially when they're still very much in parent mode & the BF/GF has a similar relationship with his/her own parents.

But somewhere down the line, certainly after marriage & children, I agree with bookbag that you'd expect to be seen as part of the family. Well actually, as your own family unit, that's also part of / connected to two wider families. And yes, when ILs don't feel able to welcome their child's partner on those terms (it's about behaviour, not feelings) I don't think they can suddenly expect to be "inside the circle" when it comes to GC, who wouldn't exist without their SIL/DIL.

Do people really think that it is odd for parents to want to see their adult child on their own once in a while?

I'm so confused by this.

I mean, really - it's their child, the child they have raised and loved and known for, say, 30 years before a significant partner came along.

So just because their son falls in love and settles down with someone, the parent is never supposed to see their parent alone again?

Not inviting your DIL to a family wedding would be rude. Planning a meal once a year with you, your husband and your two children is not rude.

So just because their son falls in love and settles down with someone, the parent is never supposed to see their child alone again?

Nobody has said that! All I can say is that I don't know any PIL who would organize what they called a "family meal" without their children's families being included. I think it would sound totally different to say: "You know, we really fancy the idea of just having a meal with DS & DD on x occasion" - it's the whole thing of defining your family in a way that excludes their loved ones that's the problem.

I don't think it's ever occurred to my PIL to try to have a get-together just with DH & my SIL. Partly practical, I guess - they're in the UK but hundreds of miles from us, SIL & BIL are in another country. So there's just no way it would happen. And PIL love their GC, our sons, so there's no way they'd want a family event without them there. Would you still not think it was rude if PIL wanted their children AND GC present, with only children's spouses shut out?

This thread is actually making me really appreciate my PIL.

Some years ago when my parents were alive, my sisters and I found ourselves alone with them - no husbands, children etc - I can't remember where they all were!

And it was really nice. I wish it had happened more often now.

I think it shows a generous - and well normal spirit to wave off your dh/dw if they want to spend a bit of time with their parents. It seems controlling, mealy-mouthed and insecure if you begrudge your dh having a meal with his parents or - as some posters appear to - mind a dh even visiting on his own.

Not really, no. It would be rude if they did it all the time, but I honestly wouldn't mind if they did it every now and again.

A previous poster raises a good point - the premise of the thread seems to depend on very stable, lasting marriages/longterm rels, and to not take account of the fact that the DiL/SIL relationship only exists by virtue of a marriage/longterm rel, which isn't guaranteed to last forever. In that sense, it's completely unlike the child-parent rel. Those posters who claim to treat their SILs and DILs like their children, or posters who are treated that way by their ILs, what happens in the event of an acrimonious divorce?

Actually, for this sunday, bookbag it was other DS who booked the table, not me.

So I suppose it's him who would be getting it in the neck from you in your scenario.

Well, good luck with that. He's robust, to say the least and unlikely to pay much heed. The phrase boo hoo would be used.

i am pretty confident that should dh and i divorce i would still maintain a relationship with my inlaws-if only because i am the mother of their only grnadchildren! i've been part of their lives for over 20 years-do you think that just stops?

DH is like a son to my parents to the point of my father calling him "sport". Really, my parents are the parents DH never had, so we're all pretty tight knit.

I think we get the same amount. Except for DD, she gets way spoiled and I'm just fine with that.

My MIL does treat me the same as dh , maybe because other than us she has only her husband and his children (and their children) but her and her hubby have only been together 10 years and his kids are mine and dhs ages.

also I speak to her daily and love and like her more than my mum and she knows that. and she always wanted more children...

Frau if your son responded like that to me backed up by you I would be questioning my relationship with your family.

Out of interest what would you do if your DS just turned up with his GF having made the assumption that she would be included?

oh and to whoever asked, if me and DH were ever to divorce and it get messy my relationship with his mum wouldn't change at all.

But thurlow, it's one thing to say you'd like to get together with your own original family - DH/DW, adult children - from time to time. As you say, there might be many years of shared history there.

But that's not the case with regard to your GC. They only exist as a result of your adult child's relationship with their partner, & by definition you had no pre-existing relationship with them before you knew your DIL/SIL. How could it not be rude & very weird to say you want a specially arranged family event (& I'm not talking casual popping in / day to day interactions in which only one parent is present) in which their mum / dad was actively excluded? You don't get to define your adult child's family in a way that includes only your "blood" relatives.

I agree with Brenda that it shows a generous spirit not to begrudge your partner doing things without you; but in my case I admit that that wouldn't extend to allowing myself to be written out of my own family, as I've read (on MN) of some PIL trying to do in relation to their DIL.

As I said, my PIL aren't like that at all. And it seems to me that if family means anything positive at all then it should be something inclusive, not exclusive, where outsiders are embraced, & some degree of change is accepted as inevitable & approached flexibly. The only people I've ever heard of who focus on the importance of "blood", rather than the quality of relationships, have sounded really mean-spirited & unpleasant.

I know the thing about not losing a son but gaining a daughter, or vice versa, is a bit of cliche, but I thought it was the ideal for most families. Clearly not.

My GPIL treat me like their granddaughter. (They are basically like DPs parents) thy spend the same on me for Xmas ect as they do on DP. They include me in everything, I'm definitely part of the family.

MIL on the other hand can't stand me and treats me very differently. I don't mind as she doesn't really bother with us much.

My parents don't really like DP. No reason why, they just don't like anyone. They hardly like me! They treat him very differently and buy him one small thing for christmas which is very awkward as his family are so generous to me.

bookbag40 If your husband went out to hang with his buddies, would you demand to be included too? You sound clingy and controlling. Thank god Frau's DS's GF isn't you.

You need to work on yourself.

Me and DB hang out just us sometimes, and sometimes it's just me and DM. Should everyone be upset that we're not including everyone? You don't have to include every single person every single time you decide to visit.

You sound like those people that get hang ups about seeing parties on facebook you weren't invited to.

When you get married, you are a team, not a singular unit. That means you get to have your own likes, dislikes, and yes.. even your own separate space to use at your leisure.

She would be made welcome, bookbag, and an extra chair and meal would be found for her.

But given that it's not happened in five years, I think I'm safe enough.

And absolutely I would back DS2 over you - every time. Don't be silly. If you weren't robust enough to be able to allow your husband two afternoons a year with his mother and siblings, then I'd seriously wonder what had happened in your own family set up to make you so insecure.

I think I'm safe enough.

Yes.....your safe alright.....

Actually the more you post the more I can see why your DIL hasn't wanted to attend your precious family do. You seem quite bitter and slightly unhinged about things and it's sad that you would be happy to back your son up in having a go at your other sons girlfriend. I would be embarrassed if any of my children were rude to their siblings partners

I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting to see your adult children without their spouses occasionally; I certainly will when DD grows up. I'm just wondering what Frau's reaction would be if her DS had another engagement on one of the appointed family days, i.e. a wedding to attend on 1st weekend in Dec and the rest of the family had commitments for the other weekends that month?