was SIL rude ?

[EvilTendency1]

Friend told me today what happened at her place last weekend.

Her and her husband had put on a Christmas meal early for his side of the family (parents are deceased and it's only her DH's brother and his family)

They have two children and her in laws have three, so 5 children under 8, youngest is 4.

The 4 yr old starts to announce that she is hungry and wants some crisps, she wanders into the kitchen and starts looking in cupboards looking for them, my friend tells her neice 'Dinner will be 5-10 mins, so no I won't be giving out crisps - won't be long though ! " in a cheery voice.

Child complains to her mother, so friends SIL comes into the kitchen "Where are some crisps ? Mary is hungry." Friend starts to plate up, won't be long. SIL sniffs and says "Mary will have the crisps thanks, she's hungry now." then starts to look in cupboards and finds some, opens them and Mary gets her crisps.

10 mins later Mary doesn't want her dinner - she's not hungry now.

Pudding is served and Mary starts helping herself to things from the table and complaining that she wants other things as well. Friends DH announces then at the table to his neice "Mary, you didn't eat any dinner and in this house that means you don't get any pudding."

Mary bursts into tears and all hell breaks loose, SIL demands that her BIL apologise THIS instant for talkinf to a child that way and no one dictates to her child what she can and can't eat.

They leave 10 mins later and children are crying etc as their cousins are leaving halfway through a meal etc.

She told me she found her SIL actions really rude and doesn't want to see her again. I did admit I found her DH's comments a bit rude and I would have challenged him as well if someone spoke to my child like that.

Was the SIL being unreasonable and over reacting do you think ? I find it bloody rude to feed a child crisps right before a meal though and would have made my own dcs eat their dinner - there would have been no alternative s offered I'm afraid.

As I clearly stated, my point about the host being seen as a pushover was referring to the crisps.

Host: (paraphrasing) no you can't have any crisps I'm dishing up dinner
Marys mum: actually yes she will have some crisps now (gets out crisps and gives them to Mary)

Really? That's not undermining? Okay then.

we don't normally do this but its a special occasion but why is it not a special occasion for us mum? We had already had to eat our dinner before pudding and she didn't even touch hers.

Seems totally fair to me.

That would work if none of the children had to eat their dinner but that wasn't the case was it?

Blimey, what a big scene caused over something that probably goes on in quite a few families and people manage to deal with it without guests running out in tears!

Yes, it was bad manners for the SIL to insist her dd got crisps just before the meal got served. But maybe she knew that the meal was something her dd didn't like and was worried about her saying so. (It is embarrassing when your child says that.). The host could easily have suggested that the crisps be kept till the end of the meal.

There should have been encouragement to try a bit of the meal but no fuss made about a barely touched dinner. Why cause a big scene at a social gathering?

Dessert should have been served to everyone. I remember as a child being served a plate of cottage pie at the house of someone I barely knew. I hated cottage pie then but also felt terribly guilty for only eating a bit of the topping. I remember feeling bad enough at that, but if the hosts had then implied I had been naughty and told me I couldn't have any dessert I would have been a) gutted at being the only one and b) bloody hungry!!! And I was so shy and would have felt ashamed at the whole thing. Luckily the hosts had great manners and understood about picky kids, and didn't want to single me out or let me go hungry so of course I got the dessert like everyone else. They didn't pander and offer me an alternative mains, and I didn't expect one. No major scene was caused and everyone had a nice time.

I don't see the issue really. This got completely out of hand by bad manners on both sides. I know it was family but jeez, you should still display manners, people!

Even if the SIL had explained nicely "sorry, I know you've gone to the effort of making a lovely meal but dd is going through a picky stage and is not keen on X. We also had a very early breakfast and I'm worried about her having a melt down and spoiling the meal for everyone - do you mind if she has a few crisps to keep her going?"

That would have been courteous and fine. The host may have been a bit reluctant to do so but if she'd had manners should have given a few crisps graciously.

As for the dessert refusal. Words fail me. My BIL has tried to comment on this with one of my kids when they were very young and pickier and were at my mum's house and she served him dessert after he didn't eat much mains. I said to ds that I would have preferred he had eaten more mains as if we had been at home then he wouldn't be getting dessert but seeing as it was a special occasion he could this time. Simple reply to people like BIL interfering is to say "well, we all parent differently, don't we?" And leave it at that.

No need for flouncing, just an ability to grit your teeth and ignore. And bend the normal rules a little bit at family occasions.

SIL is cheeky, she was talking down to you and wanted to undermine you in your own home. Good for your DH - whats with the big scene its not as if he shouted and swore at his niece. I hope youre not thinking of apologising or aiming to smooth things over. Good for your DH - he didnt go along with ridiculously pandering to his sister & niece, which would have been even more undermining. In your place I wouldn't say a thing about it at all. Let them stew. Maybe they'll think about behaving a little better than that if they want to visit again..and if they don't want to visit then so what, life goes on

The child is indulged. No food/eating problems apparent, indulged by the mother, badly parented and spoiled. The SIL gave a clear message to her daughter when she went into the cupboard for crisps, overriding the host cooking, that if you want something enough you just go and get it - where's the lesson that no, you can't have everything you want no matter what fuss you kick up? Little Mary knows she only has to whine and mummy will do her bidding.

If there'd been a delay in the meal coming then the SIL should have managed it better long before this - do you mind if I give her a couple of cherry tomatoes and a bit of cheese to keep her going? Not crisps!

Same with the meal. If the actual meal was going to be a problem - something Mary doesn't like which is fair enough - then the mother should have said she'll probably manage a potato and a couple of peas, or whatever, but can I put a slice of ham with it rather than the beef? At least make an attempt at her being part of a meal because it's polite when you're in someone else's home, even if family. Then the DH wouldn't have said what he said about pudding.

For those saying she was affecting no one well she would have bothered me. The pair of them would have pissed me off no end - for undermining me in the kitchen, for putting up no attempt at modelling proper eating habits (i.e. dinner before dessert) in front of my children and for acting like you can do what the hell you like in my house. Personally I don't want to be around kids like Mary even if she is family. And I certainly wouldn't want to be around the SIL either. A fussy kid is one thing (you can overlook a few things if the parent looks like they're actually trying to parent) - a parent indulging that fussy kid is not someone I want to spend much time with, especially when you have a kids of a similar age.

I think both adults were rude. If it was my house I would have said nothing and let Mary have pudding and I would have bitched about SIL as soon as she left

Hopefully the resident children actually enjoyed their main course rather than viewing it as the awful ordeal that house times decree must be undertaken before a fruit salad can be contemplated. What is this rule based eating that sets up the idea that a sweet course is the prize, the holy grail to be won by those who can endure a chicken drumstick and some potato?

No wonder all these rules and battles result in rows.

They both sound as bad as each other (the SIL and DH). SIL shouldn't have got the child some crisps; DH shouldn't have made a fuss. Any other day, sure - but Christmas dinner?! Just let her eat cake all day if she wants!

I would have asked her to try some of the dinner, maybe a spud and some meat, and then let her crack on with dessert.

SIL was very rude on both counts and making a very large tod got Her own back by spoiling her DD

BIL did nothing wrong in pointing out the house rules in the way he did to the SILs little girl - I would have done exactly the same - my house, my rules & if the parents don't have the good manners to see that, then there's the door - use it

I would never let another DC get away with anything here, that my own DCs are not allowed to, that would not be fair & I would not tolerate any guest that challenged that - it would not be fair to my own & she comes first - end of

Am I the only person who had rules which I applied to my own children which I would never have enforced on a visitor?
My children had to eat vegetables. So if we had visitors, I would be there saying 'DS, you can't get down til you've eaten your peas' Did I make other kids eat vegetables? No, and if DCs complained I explained it was my job to bring them up and that was what we did in our family. Family rules, not house rules. No one had trouble understanding it.
And if you are an adult host it is your job to make sure your guests have a good time, and I think if a child in those circumstances behaves like this little girl you need to just breathe deeply and remember you are the adult. And not her parent.

Yy Blu

The DH is the girls uncle, did people never get told off by people other than their parents when they were younger?

The sil is a moron or just had a brain fart that day.

I think SIL was v rude. I also think she will have a very picky eater on her hands if she carries on supporting silly unhealthy eating habits instead of proper meals. Crisps and pudding is a naff meal.

BIL was just saying the sort of thing he would say to one of his own kids. I don't think he meant it rudely. He's just used to children having proper food habits

Also what about all the time, money and effort your friend and her husband put into cooking. SIL shows little respect for that

I think the crisps was a silly thing to do. Unless the child was very little, they can wait 5 mins for dinner.

But.

I think that on Christmas day of all days, just let the kids have pudding if that's what they want.

I also don't like pudding being dependent on dinner. I don't want to make any food extra-desirable or restricted so in my house, on any day of the year, if there's pudding you get to have some, (although I appreciate an earnest effort to try some dinner, even if you think you don't like it, and normally get that)

SIL was exceptionally rude. I would be open mouthed at someone going through cupboards to find snack food for their child 5 mins before a dinner I had cooked, family or not. A 4yo is not a toddler - they will not expire of hunger whilst waiting for their dinner.

On the other thing I'm on the fence. I don't think the DH was rude - I think he was extremely reasonable. Children also need to learn that different families consider different things right or polite. Otherwise it's setting them up for social problems later. And it was not a rude thing to say. However, it's clear the child is badly parented, so unfortunately it also punishes the child at a family party for something that is essentially the parents' fault.

I think I would have said something akin to the DH but said "In this house Mary we normally don't have any pudding if we don't eat our dinner. Would you like us to allow you to have pudding even though you didn't eat your dinner? Since it's Christmas you may have some pudding, but we are very sad that you could not eat some of your main course like everyone else". Job done. Yes it's a bit passive aggressive at the parents, but I equally don't think the DH shouldn't say something either - IMO it's very bad to allow an child to behave as though there are special rules for them and they don't have to abide by the normal rules of the house - it sets up a bad and resentful dynamic between cousins (or indeed siblings) to appear to be indulging behaviour in one child that isn't allowed in others.

And I'm loving this thread by the way - classic MN! A fantastic read with a glass of wine ;)

I have a mental picture of the father as a bearded, robed , old testament paterfamilias laying down the law in relation to the correct way to eat jelly and ice- cream in his house. I wonder if the house rules are laid out in vellum bound books?

The child is indulged. No food/eating problems apparent, indulged by the mother, badly parented and spoiled.

I agree with this completely.

See, in my house, I allowed DS, aged 2 or 3, to have some choc buttons he spotted half way through his spag Bol. Had a few buttons, went back to his main course, which I thought more productive than have him hanker, whinge and tantrum while I said 'you must eat tha before you are allowed chocolate' . What happens for visiting children under those circumstances? Was DS being badly parented? Should a visiting parent tell him off?
(He was a terrible eater at the time, of sweet and savoury. Eats anything now and doesn't ever favour dessert over main)

Th kid didn't spot crisps she looked for them. the kid didn't attempt her main at all she decided the proper food was for other people, her parents fully supported her having crisps followed by pudding.

I think the fact it was crisps the wee one was after says it all to be honest.

"If there'd been a delay in the meal coming then the SIL should have managed it better long before this - do you mind if I give her a couple of cherry tomatoes and a bit of cheese to keep her going? Not crisps!"

Don't see the difference, myself!

Sil was v rude by getting the crisps for Mary, probably knowing fine well this would mean she wouldn't eat her main meal.

However whilst the parent is present in your house! I do believe it is up to them to enforce their rules (obviously I would point out any dangerous behaviour, or for instance if they were jumping on my furniture I would ask them to stop) but I do think its rude to discipline someone else's child as much of a brat the child is and the mother clearly encouraging such behaviour.

SIL was spoiling/pandering to her DD