Should SIL be forced to bring DD to graveyard?

[CoupDetat]

Posting on behalf of my SIL, my DH's brother's wife. When BIL was a toddler and DH wasn't born PIL had a stillborn DS and of course after he was buried they visited his grave with BIL and then DH, this tradition has continued until the present day. SIL has just had her first DD and PIL want her and the baby to start coming up to visit the grave with them, BIL and DH.

The problem is SIL doesn't feel comfortable bringing her DD. her reasons are that she doesn't feel comfortable enmeshing her DD in this tradition as she feels it is spreading and sharing the grieving process to a baby and isn't needed. She doesn't mind if DD is told about her uncle or anything else, she's just not comfortable with the tradition itself for children. BIL wants to bring his DD to please his PILs as he doesn't really care personally if his DD is brought so SIL feels backed into a corner and feels like she is being made to feel guilty.

Is she BU?

SIL isn't been unreasonable not to want to go herself but I think it would be unreasonable for her to prevent her dh taking their daughter when she's older.

My mum used to take my brother and myself to visit her mum's grave once a year. I always rather enjoyed it. We cleaned the stone, chatted to gran then go off and poke around the old bits of the cemetery. I don't think remembering the dead is morbid at all. Quite the opposite in fact.

I've been teaching for a long time; I'm a head of year so a massive part of my job is pastoral care. Every now and then, I encounter a pupil whose parents have lost a child before the pupil was born. The parents' grief, and subsequent traditions, can have a profound effect on a growing young person. They tend to have a lot more questions about death and can often feel confused about how they should feel. Whilst I am not, in anyway, shape or form, saying that the parents are doing anything wrong, (obviously they aren't at all, it is just a horrible situation all round) it isn't something that any parent would choose for their child to go through. Clearly, in the case of my pupils, the parents have no choice, the children are (or would have been) siblings. However, in your sils case, her dd is not a sibling. I think she is right to want to distance her from her grandparents grief. I have nothing but sympathy for those who have lost a child. I've no idea how you even get up in the morning let alone raise other children. I do not mean to cause any offence with the above. I hope it reads as sensitively as I meant it too.

It's very interesting that there are people in another thread mentioning the poor way in which grief is dealt with in this country and here we have a classic example.

I would imagine that the PIL want their lost child to be remembered by the family. I don't think there is anything unusual or wrong about that and I think taking a baby to a family grave, once a year, is a very small sacrifice to make if it brings the PIL some comfort.

I'm Irish, living in England for years, and find the whole English attitude to death bizarre.

As it's once a year & would bring comfort to the in laws I would do it. The baby isn't going to know whether they're in a graveyard, park, hill or garden! A wooded graveyard sounds rather peaceful. A little tradition of placing flowers on the grave might be helpful.

My uncle was lost at sea 6 months before I was born. I grew up knowing he had been lost & when I eventually travelled to his final port threw some flowers in the sea. If he had a grave I'd visit it if nearby despite never knowing him.

Vvega, I'm sorry if you feel this is personalized in anyway. I don't think anyone here would be nasty enough to say that it meant someone was traumatizing a child by doing this but I also don't think anyone is 'delicate' or 'selfish' if they decline. I agree with the fact that crying can be upsetting to younger children. This is what worried me when it came to my DC as I know it could upset them. DH has said on these occasions MIL can go one of two ways, completely silent or crying which is of course understandable but terribly hard to explain to young children which will eventually happen if SIL allows her DD to be brought into the tradition.

Ptolemys, I don't think this is a small thing at all. It's unnecessarily exposing young children to so much upset and no I'm not saying that they will never not be exposed or know about it but I agree with Genesgirl on the fact that shielding them as much as possible will not color their view or childhood.

This bereavement is nothing to do with sil and in her place I would feel completely weird going to the grave of a baby who died 20+ years ago, who I never met. I wouldn't fancy taking ds either. I just wouldn't feel comfortable and I don't see why the pils would even want her there.

teddy, with SIL it's the fact that she feels her child is sharing the grief as MIL can get understandably very upset at the grave and she doesnt want her daughter exposed to this so soon. Yes DD is a newborn now but if SIL lets her go she will be expected to go each year and then she will get older and eventually know what's going on around her, excluding adults crying/grieving. PIL's second oldest is always remembered, DH tells our DC they had an uncle who they lost at a young age and BIL will tell the same to his daughter.

If I could also point out BIL doesn't care one way or the other if DD goes, he just wants to please his DM.

I don't avoid death as a subject or concept. I have been really straight with my kids about it. We haven't needed to be at a graveside to discuss it. My keenest loss was my mother, who insisted on no grave or gravestone, so rather it has come up in general conversation and been talked about openly.

I'm not an anniversary loving person, nor a sharer of my grief. Wanting others to share my grief on a marked anniversary would completely go against my grain. Therefore, having this asked of me from an in law say, would make me uncomfortable.

I was made to visit a graveyard to see the grave of a relative I had never met when I was eight.

I found it very, very frightening and it really coloured my view of the deceased. I had no happy memories of them alive so whenever they were mentioned I only thought of the graveyard and how scared I'd been.

I suffered from nightmares for months afterwards, and I'm still affected by it as I don't visit the graves of family members very often as I feel uneasy, when I should feel comforted by their presence.

I think your SIL is right not to let her child go, it won't make any difference to her dd just now but if she goes every year before she understands grief and remembering those who are lost she could be scared or upset, and that is likely to really upset PIL. It sounds as though they have dealt with their grief by setting aside a day for their son, and I think being confronted with the knowledge that not everyone feels about him the way they do on the day they remember him would be very hurtful for them.

I wouldn't let my child go , your SIL must do what she feels is best

Coupdetat - as a child I was brought along to a lot of funerals, wakes (which normally contain an open coffin in Ireland), burials and graveyards - seen a lot of adults (and children) crying and grieving - it's part of life. I've not been traumatised.

What is unhealthy is this idea that grieving and death should be hidden.

I would probably let my child go; "Daddy had a sister and we like to visit her grave to remember when she was with us". IF they can be as positive as that. If it's wailing & hysterics then definite no!

I think if your SIL doesn't want to go that's fine
She has to argue with her DH about whether or not to take the baby

I don't think seeing people crying at a graveyard once a year is traumatising for a child. People are sad when they experience loss of a loved one.

I agree with Pictish, I would find it very strange, and yes, you could say narcissistic. The baby died many years ago and their sons may want to support their parents but they're not grieving/ remembering. The DILS certainly arent. The grandchildren? Seriously? I am also from a culture where death is far less taboo and grew up attending funerals with open caskets, wakes etc but still think the PILs are being not only u but pretty OTT

vvega, I'm not saying crying isn't normal but what I am saying is that to some people exposing children to them being upset can be upsetting for them. This all depends on the child, person and experience as PP's have said.

teddy, I never once said death and grief should be hidden, what I have said is that it should not be invited so willingly into the lives and routine of young children as it can upset them, especially since DN doesn't have a more important role such as DH and BIL. Not everyone person will be the same in this, grief and death didn't affect you but it has other people as young children. My SIL does not want to take this risk.

I also agree with Lokibear on the fact that if DN were to grow up and become frightened by the grief PILs show and then she gets upset that could make PILs feel even worse that they had frightened her.

I wouldn't like to visit the grave of a baby with my new baby.
It would be too difficult & I wouldn't like any comparisons being made.
In time she may choose to go but its too soon now imo

Is the anniversary coming around again soon OP ?

I would view this as an issue to be dealt with each year for the foreseeable future.

If the anniversary is immediate then an absolute no for this year. A week old baby and its mother should not be forced to go anywhere they don't wish. Also no to separating mother from baby to take the baby along with them.

Next year and following year or 2 would depends on temperament of the child at that stage. Some babies and toddlers are a delight on a 2 hour car journey and walk through the woods, but then others not so much.

Once the DD has reached an age where she could have a concept of a relative being gone and missed by the rest of her family then I would have no issue with either DD going or myself joining them. It's a nice way to show respect and mark the significance of loved ones who are no longer here.

If your SIL finds it hard to show her feelings on things then she needs to practice really. She now has a child and even with the nicest of families there are bound to be disagreements or differing viewpoints on parenting issues in the future. Sooner or later she will have to put her foot down and do things the way she likes. It may as well be now.

SIL is probably best to speak to her DH alone and thrash out an agreement between themselves that they are both happy with and then present this to PIL as a united front.

You and your SIL ABU. Why do you feel your SIL needs to 'stand up for herself' against grieving parents wanting to include their lost child in the family as much as the other children?

It's almost obscene to call that morbid, and highly offensive. We still visit my grandfathers grave at least once a year and there is nothing 'morbid' about it - we also went as children. It's a nice peaceful spot, we help clear the weeds and add new flowers, it's nice for my DGM that she feels we care, even though he died when I was very young.

I lost a sister but none of my dds have been to her grave. As a family the grave reminds us of her death and we'd rather celebrate her short life so flowers at home on the anniversary. That said, everyone is different. I imagine this is your pil trying to ensure the baby is remembered and people know where it is so they can tend to the grave once pil are dead. Do they stand and sob or is it just a peaceful moment to remember?
It isn't something I would do but i'm not sure I can see the harm and would probably allow this to happen.

I think cultural difference are really clear on this thread. I grew up in Ireland and it would be completely normal to visit graves, at least once a year. Every time we went home after my dad died, we visited his grave with my mum and my children came too. It was no doubt upsetting for them to see her cry but that was the reality - she loved him, she missed him, she grieved for him. Why pretend otherwise? it certainly never traumatised them to see adults grieving for their loved ones.

There is something sad about a woman's grief for her stillborn child, expressed in a once a year visit to the child's grave, being labelled narcissitic. if a MN came on here and said she was desperately sad about the loss of her baby 5 years on, she would get nothing but support - is there a time limit to grieving for a child? I know mothers of dead children who visit the grave once a week and once a day and once a year and never (my own MIL still misses her dead son and he is a much-remembered part of the family but she almost never visits the grave)

My guess is the PILs are worried their much loved, much lamented child will be forgotten once they are dead themselves so want to keep his place in the family. It is kind of undertandable.

IN the SIL's case, if she doesn't feel comfortable going then she shouldn't. If she doesn't want her week old baby to go (and I wouldn't either - too little) then she says no. But next year if her husband wants to bring their 1 year old to visit the grave, I don't think she should stop him. Her grandparents grief and rememberance for this baby is part of her daugher's family history/story. But then again, like I say i grew up visiting graves, going to funerals etc.

I agree with Teddy and would also refer to the other thread about how badly we deal with grief in this country - this is a real opportunity (obviously as the child gets older) to understand about death, bereavement and sadness. Why do we need to protect children from something that will happen to all of us?

There are many ways in which a person can acknowledge the anniversary of someone's death. There's no right or wrong way.

I don't understand why anyone would say that because the SiL would prefer not to visit the grave of someone she never knew (a particular way in which to acknowledge the anniversary), that she is somehow lacking in feeling towards the surviving relatives.

Would the PiL really want someone there who would feel uncomfortable and maybe even distressed?

It's unnecessarily exposing young children to so much upset and no I'm not saying that they will never not be exposed or know about it but I agree with Genesgirl on the fact that shielding them as much as possible will not color their view or childhood.

Why is it exposing them to 'so much upset'? Are your pils going to go to the grave a cry and scream uncontrollably in the presence of their young grandchildren?

Is is possible to remember a life quite happily. People don't become about nothing other than their death as soon as they've gone. There's absolutely no reason why this couldn't be handled perfectly well in a way that is not at all harmful to the children. If you choose not to do that knowing that it would comfort someone close who has experienced such a loss then it's about your own fears surrounding death, not the actual grave visiting.