Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 10 11

Original poster

to think this is a little bit mean?

253 replies

scrunchiemount · 17/03/2015 10:35

SIL is preggers and the baby is due at the beginning of May. DH and I get along v well with both his DB and SIL, no issues at all. SIL has two other sisters who both have kids, but DH's and DB's parents have no other grandkids - this would be their first. DMIL in particular is super excited about the baby being born. She is an extremely quiet, gentle, non-interfering type of MIL - I think she is great. However DH received a call from his DB the other day saying when the baby is born they don't want any visitors at all for 4 weeks. I thought this was a bit sad for family who want to see the baby but recognise it's their first baby and it's totally up to them. However we have since found out the DSIL is allowing her parents to go and see the baby in the hospital, but not DH's parents. I think this is mean. DH is furious about it on behalf of his parents and wants to say something to his DB. I agree that it's mean but I don't think it's our place to say so.

I am not fussed on our behalf (obviously I would like to go and see the baby as soon as we can but I don't mind waiting a few weeks if that's what they want - I recognise it's up to them!) but I do think it's a little sad that DSIL's family will be allowed and not DBIL's. What does everyone think?

OP posts:

shovetheholly · 17/03/2015 11:18

I am a bit shocked that people think this is off. It's her body, her baby, her rules. A month isn't really that long to wait, and if she has anxiety about social situations (the control thing) then it seems like a reasonable request.

Just because you find your MIL quiet, unassuming and lovely doesn't mean that she also does. There is clearly a reason why she has invited her own family and not yours - she clearly feels more comfortable with them, or she wouldn't have chosen to do it this way. Maybe if you all focused less on what you wanted and more on supporting a new mother in feeling comfortable, you would be invited.

Original poster

scrunchiemount · 17/03/2015 11:21

shovetheholly, I agree with you, there's no need to be so defensive! I've stated on several occasions I respect the fact it's her choice. But I'm sorry, it is unfair that she would invite her parents and not her DH's. I know that she has the same opinion of my MIL as I do because we've talked about it at length (we do generally get on very well!). DSIL has even commented that she finds our MIL much easier to be around than her own mother at times.

I'm not focussing at all on what I want, if I was doing that I'd insist on going to see the baby the first day it was born, would I not?! I'm happy to stay away until we're wanted.

OP posts:

Charlie97 · 17/03/2015 11:22

That is very very harsh! I think SIL needs to think how she would feel if she has a son and his wife says she can't see her grandchild for four weeks.

That may seem a long way off is, but it could happen in the future!

Not sure why you would treat oneset of grandparents as second class citizens? I'm sure that both sets are equally excited and love new grandchild.

And four weeks is ridiculous, in my opinion! Is mum not going to leave the house for four weeks then? Really? Surely she will be expected to take baby to clinic by that stage? Will she not want to start a normal routine by four weeks?

I would be devastated if I were MIL.

Original poster

scrunchiemount · 17/03/2015 11:24

charlie97, see update, it's now 2 weeks no visitors at all, including her parents

in my heart if I'm honest I do still think that's slightly unfair on the grandparents, but at the end of the day it is up to them! and it's better than 4 weeks...with her parents and not his...

OP posts:

plantsitter · 17/03/2015 11:24

I went a bit mad in both pregnancies, particularly the first. It's partly fear of the unknown tbh. If I were you I would stay well clear and if I were your MIL I would be making it very clear that she would follow the DIL's wishes to the letter but would be available whenever she wanted if she changes her mind. It's the only way I reckon. Very easy to feel like public property when pregnant, especially with a first grandchild (although actually I wouldn't know about that as both mine have been second or third on both sides).

Charlie97 · 17/03/2015 11:26

Shove surely the baby is 'their' baby? I'm sure she didn't conceive it alone?

Surely the father has some right to a reasonable request to show their baby to its grandparents?

shovetheholly · 17/03/2015 11:26

Sorry, I'm gearing up for a visit by my (very pushy) inlaws this coming weekend, and probably coming over far more bullish than I intend!

I am not sure that I see it in the same way, though - saying it's about 'fairness' makes it sound like people have a right to see a grandchild within a certain time. Of course, it would be nice if they could, but it's really up to the parents to say what they can cope with. I am completely perplexed that so many people see this time as a kind of race - with those invited earliest the most privileged. Don't get me wrong, I think it's lovely that you're all so excited, but does it really matter if you have to wait a bit, beyond the social priority of these visits?

Charlie97 · 17/03/2015 11:27

Doh sorry missed update!!!!

Charlie97 · 17/03/2015 11:27

And much fairer decision I feel!

Original poster

scrunchiemount · 17/03/2015 11:28

plantsitter I agree, this is why I'm having a hard time with this, because I'm kind of on the fence. I do not want SIL to feel uncomfortable, nor to feel like she has to do what other people wants.

As I have said before, I do think it's partly because we are polar opposites personality wise. And I think it is also nerves on her part because of the baby...she was really unsure whether she even wanted kids for years and doesn't really enjoy being around other people's, so it was a big decision for them.

OP posts:

musicalendorphins2 · 17/03/2015 11:30

Yanbu. Hopefully your SIL will come around and invite them to come meet the baby sooner. But at least she isn't making her own parents "more important" to your in-laws now. That was the terrible part of her "rule". I imagine it is a bit of anxiety SIL is having.

ImperialBlether · 17/03/2015 11:32

But is she saying she won't see anyone for two weeks? Nobody at all? She's going to stay at home with the baby and not see anyone?

How would she feel if she was in hospital for a week and nobody came to see her? Are they expected to send presents and cards or doesn't she want them, either?

Maybe she doesn't realise how proud she's going to be of the baby and how much she's going to want to show it off.

buildmeabuttercup · 17/03/2015 11:35

Shovetheholly that's a tad unfair. The baby has a father too you know.

The OP has never suggested they are only focused on what they want, just that its a bit mean to exclude one family, which it is.

SaucyJack · 17/03/2015 11:35

" saying it's about 'fairness' makes it sound like people have a right to see a grandchild within a certain time."

If they're otherwise sane, reasonable people who you want your child to have a close and loving relationship with, I wouldn't necessarily argue that they didn't have a "right" to meet their grandchild. And most certainly the father does have the right to have his parents meet his child too.

There's a fair size middle-ground between PILs watching you give birth through a hospital door window, and making undemanding local grandparents wait an entire month for a half-hour cuddle.

Original poster

scrunchiemount · 17/03/2015 11:35

imperial, yes she (or 'they', really, I should say, though I suspect it is mostly her) doesn't want to see anyone at all for two weeks. That is the length of BIL's paternity leave and they want it to be just them and the baby.

OP posts:

richthegreatcornholio · 17/03/2015 11:35

Sounds a bit strange to me. About to have our first and whilst I guess we don't want 100s of visitors at first we'll have grandparents and close family around quite a bit. Both our sets of parents are planning to come and help, whether that be bringing dinner round or babysitting for a couple of hours to give us some sleep if we're that sleep deprived. I just thought that was what families did for each other? Many hands make light work and all that.

buildmeabuttercup · 17/03/2015 11:36

Sorry shovetheholly, didnt see your last post

CunningCat · 17/03/2015 11:37

I still find two weeks of not meeting new born very odd! My twins were prem and in nicu, I found the GP's visiting everyday until they came home very comforting and was grateful for the support! I accept that my situation was unusual, but even if that hadn't been the case I would've wanted GP's to meet them asap!! I guess it is down to the individual, shame for the GP's though.

StockingFullOfCoal · 17/03/2015 11:37

I'm sorry but that is fucking despicable. The baby has a father too, the father should be able to his parents meet the baby.

What the fuck is this weird obsession with keeping people away?!

For a bit of perspective, my DH had a son who died at 4 weeks old from SIDS. One of his biggest regrets is not taking his son to see his Great Grandma. Everytime I see these threads I think of that.

I have a large family - 7 sisters, most have husbands and children, I have always loved the post birth fussing - yummy home cooked meals bought, cups of tea made, cleaning and laundry done its almost tempting to have another just for that part

DecaffTastesWeird · 17/03/2015 11:40

2 weeks, no visitors at all is definitely fairer. I read so many threads on the MN pregnancy board about this when I was pregnant that I started to think that I needed to ban visitors when my DC was born. So glad I didn't. It was lovely having DPILs and my own lot visit us in hospital. When we were at home later, MIL even took DD from me one evening and I had a 2 hour nap. I think your DSIL might regret her decision tbh.

LucilleBluth · 17/03/2015 11:40

Who are these men, fgs. My DH couldn't wait to show his babies off to his parents, I would NEVER have taken that away from him. All three of mine have been cooed over a few hours after birth by FIL, MIL and two SILs.......(yes even after a placenta previa induced C Section with blood loss), now I understand not wanting a parade of visitors at the hospital if that's what you want.........it's fucking madness.

Original poster

scrunchiemount · 17/03/2015 11:43

stocking sorry to hear about your DH's son, that is terrible...

I am also from a large family and I do think that's a big part of why I don't really get SIL's attitude. Like I say it's just been the two of them pretty much for 20 odd years as they got together so young, and they don't tend to spend much time with family on either side. It does upset DH who spends quite a bit of time with his parents.

OP posts:

ImperialBlether · 17/03/2015 11:46

I've never met a woman in RL who has wanted to keep people away from her after the birth. MN is quite an eye-opener.

ImperialBlether · 17/03/2015 11:47

That means, then, that her husband won't be there when his family see the baby for the first time. Won't he mind that? I loved watching my family with my new babies - it was all part of the loveliness of having just had a baby.

CunningCat · 17/03/2015 11:48

Me neither imperial. Its like being in a parallel universe!!

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 10 11