G/Children sleepover at granny's house

[Zabelithe]

I'd be interested to hear at what age most of you mums let your DD and DS sleep at granny's house. I ask because our GD who is 4 and a half has still not been allowed to stay at ours despite the fact we have looked after her during the day while mum was working.

"Why is it being rude to say that they don't want their child staying with you? Just because you ask doesn't automatically mean you will get a yes!"

Of course not. But are you honestly saying you wouldn't be even remotely disconcerted by a flat no with no explanation at all from a close friend?

A close friend would probably already know that sleep overs were not desired, if that were the case. They would probably also know the reason why. And a close friend wouldn't push it under those circs. either.

It really doesn't sound like the OP has had a flat no though, tbh. She is describing the situation as 'not allowed'. I still think 'sitting down' and forcing a discussion on the subject is going to be counter productive.

My children are both under 5 so this is something that hasn't happened yet. I haven't asked and haven't been asked but no I wouldn't think it rude. As the previous poster said if it was a close friend then you would know your boundaries.

A close friend would probably already know that sleep overs were not desired, if that were the case. They would probably also know the reason why. And a close friend wouldn't push it under those circs. either.

Completely agree. I think there are reasons why you might skirt around the reason why you wouldn't let a child stay with grandparents - most obviously because you were concerned about their health.

However, I think the foundation of having a good relationship with your grandchildren is having a good relationship with your children - although it may be less painful in the absence of a close relationship to blame the DIL/SIL.

That is not aimed at the OP - I don't know anything about her DIL and obviously some people are not nice and reasonable and some of them get married and therefore become DIL's. However in general, I don't think there are loads of DIL's unreasonably withholding their children from their MIL's. MN doesn't reflect this because people don't tend to spontaneously post about their boring normal perfectly happy relationships.

I think this discussion has kind of moved off track, re reading the op it does come across that she has been told her gc are too young for a sleepover and she herself is skeptical of this as a reason. TBH, It doesn't really matter the response or lack of response that was provided from either DIL or son, some people lack assertiveness and perhaps give weak excuses/skirt around issues, other more forceful but the bottom line is a no is a no! For now. I can't help thinking that looking after a grandchild during the day for child care reasons and an overnight sleepover because GP would quite enjoy this are different things.

Too young for a sleepover can't be decided on what other people do though, if that is what the op is intending.

It could mean the child is too young to go, or that the child is too young for the parent to be comfortable with it.

Both are valid, and if the OP has had a "no, she is too young" as an explanation, I think that should suffice.

I am also interested in hearing about the DS in this scenario.

I lived with my mum for the first 3 years of dd life so so days old would technically be the age dd had her first sleepover at my mums house

I trust my mum implicitly and dd loves her so sleepovers have been a regular thing all dds life, my mum took her on holiday for a week when dd was about 3yo. Infact she has taken her on holiday every year since as well she is now nearly 9yo.

Never. One set of GPs uninterested and the other live in another country. I think that's sad. I have lovely memories of staying with GP

Slithytove, I agree with you. OP was perhaps hoping for an unanimous 'of course 4 and a half is old enough, confri

Sorry posted too soon:

Basically OP was looking for confirmation that DIL or son is unreasonable. I also find the term 'not allowed' very string and perhaps could be 'not for now' in reality.

That should read strong. Phone playing up.

Bal, in no way did the OP think that her son was being UR. Just the DIL.

Cool. That's usually how it plays out! Women are left to thrash boundaries and are seen as UR!

I'm a granny to two, and I do some of the childcare. I have asked if the eldest can stay occasionally but mum and dad think its too early so I accept that, I just love having any time I get with them both. They do see more of my dil's parents but I guess that's the norm for most of us who have sons. I dont see the op as being anything other than a simple question on age and sleepovers and not an attack on her dil.

Babashka, the OP is apparently providing childcare for her DIL who won't allow overnights. Now, either OPs son has left the family or he has tragically died, or OP is blaming the DIL for something that would usually be a joint parenting decision.

Thats not the way I read the op. But we shall just have to agree to differ.

Oh yes. She has made it clear it's only the DIL she is enabling to work, no mention of DS.

Most of the conversations I have ever had about arranging child care have been with mothers. It shouldn't be so, but it is. I don't think the OP should be held responsible for the whole patriarchal edifice...And to be fair, she did say the DIL works part time.i would be interested to find out how many people on here's male partners are actively involved in organising day to day child care.......

Which preschool to send our daughter to was a joint decision, as was how often to send her and what days. Though we tend to have similar opinions about what's best so these what quite easy decisions to make. DH actually made the decision about how to use the 15 hours free childcare when she becomes eligible, as tbf his preference was more practical than my initial preference. Though yes I do agree, more often than not it seems to fall on the mums and they're also the ones who get the blame (I'm blamed for everything my DH says or does that his family don't like). I don't think it being common means people shouldn't challenge it though.

*were not what

The point is Hak, not that the plans are made with the Dil, but that if op DS is working too, then she is enabling them both to work. She makes it sound like it's only DIL benefiting.

Even if the mother does arrange the childcare, she would do it so both parents can work. And how passive/uninterested would a man have to be in his children to not have anything to do with a decision to ask his parents to provide childcare?

Slithy, stop typing faster than me!

And obviously the son isn't fussed about the kids sleeping over, otherwise he could be organising it!

I agree, it should be challenged. And the OP has not helped her case by not addressing that, and other points. But I am prepared to bet the father concerned is not even aware that the conversation has taken place.