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?

I myself understand that we all agree with grief in different ways and not one way is better than the other. I also completely understand that PILs need and want comfort and support, that their sons and we gave/give. But when it comes down to it this experience of remembrance isn't always a positive one as MIL can get very upset, which is understandable. Crying and grief are normal, our DC will experience these things but we would rather keep that later rather than sooner so by then hopefully they wll be older and more able to deal with this and more importantly they will have picked to go to baby BILs grave.

But that's not to say baby BIL is forgotten, like Mid and Back PILs talk about him as do I/SIL and DH/BIL, they explain to our children that they had an uncle they lost so that the fact that he has left us isn't hidden. So I must say thank you to all of you who have shared these painful experience in order to give insight, whether you thought SIL was BU or not.

I do think there's something a bit 'off' about PILs demanding that the growing extended family attend the graveside part. But I can understand that it's relative - even as a wife I would be uncomfortable, feeling like I had to pretend/attempt to grieve for a long-dead BIL I'd never met. And that's without even bringing new children into the mix.

Not everyone in the family can grieve for the lost child the way they do, as hard as that is for PILs to accept, and as the family grows this will become even more true (the same as it would if BIL were still alive - generationally the family would move further and further away from him). But it seems you're still willing to remember him and support PILs in a way you feel comfortable, it's a shame they've rejected that.

I don't think SIL is been unreasonable not wanting to take her baby to the grave but then my family doesn't have a tradition of visiting graves as all of my grandparents were cremated.

I would not be pressuring a mother of a newborn to visit a grave of a stillborn child. There's time and place for everything and that's not it.

I don't think it's particularly practical for a newly delivered mum and a newborn to travel a considerable journey for what will be an upsetting event. Sil's hormones will be in full riot mode, she is going to cry the place down and the whole thing will hurt rather than heal. I think she personally, not you, not dh or bil, but sil herself needs to say to pil that she recognises their grief for the child they lost. She is respectful of that and as a one off next year when the baby is a year old she hopes that bil will bring the baby with him. After that she thinks it would be better for a toddler and young child not to attend but that doesn't mean she will herself forget this loss, nor will she allow her children to forget it. As they grow older and can fully understand (I'm think 8+ tbh) she will encourage them to think about whether they want to go with pil. And that's the end of the discussion. They raise it again, she gently says 'we've talked about this and you know my feelings'
Incidentally one thing that might help is using the brother's name as a middle name. Have you done that with any of your kids or could bil use a female form for his baby? I was going to use my dead uncle's name (motorbike accident aged 19, I never knew him) as a middle name if we had a boy. It doesn't have a very nice female form so we've never done it but just intending it was a help to my grandma I know. It's a very obvious way to assert that somebody isn't forgotten.

I don't think anyone, especially a new mother, should be made to go to a grave they don't want to visit.

And that's without the 4 hour round trip, which is not good for either mum or baby so soon.

And if the baby is being breastfed, then quite frankly the PILs are being very unreasonable in expecting the baby at the graveside.

For me, it's all about how things are at the graveside. If it's very solemn (and I totally understand why it might well be) then I'd not take my children. There's a time and place for children to experience the outpouring of grief if you're lucky enough to be able to choose the time and place. I personally wouldn't choose to expose them to this element before I had to.

However, if it was more sharing stories and making the experience as positive as it can be, then that's fine and I'd happily take my children. I'm all for sharing memories of deceased relatives, remembering them etc. This can be really positive for children.

From what the OP has said, it seems like the experience is more solemn and there's no compromise to be had with grandchildren coming along later in the day. I would also therefore presume there's no compromise to having children along to the cemetery but not taking them to the graveside where the PIL are possibly most upset. With that in mind, I would say no for now. As the children get older, then I'd let them go if they asked, but I'd be making it very clear to PIL that it might not be every year if the child didn't want to do that.

what a pathetic thread
are you like this one rememberance day too op

think its morbid
do you even understand the meaning of the word???

Pictish - I totally agree with you.

This is a horrid, horrid thing for me to think, because the death of a baby you've carried is tragic. But I find this somewhat indulgent (running away to hide because I deserve to be flamed for my horrid mean-ness)

Are you pissed, catswag?

Sorry, I thought there was only 1 page! I do usually RTFT

It's not indulgent or morbid to want to remember your child or have them remembered. It is however something which requires some thought, tact and compromise from all parties involved, recognising that as years pass the people involved WILL feel differently from the parents depending on their relationship with the child. In the case of the OP and the sil they have no emotional connection at all to this situation. They have only ever seen if through others' eyes. If they go to the grave at all it should be to support pil and the brothers. If they don't feel able to do that then they need to be honest and direct about that. what they cannot do is expect pil to be 'over it' as a way out of the situation.

This has really made me think OP. My much lived grandma died a year ago and I take my DD(3) and DS(1) to visit her memorial tree in the crematorium. Neither of the children really remember her now but she adored both of them. They have seen me cry there but we have a very simple talk about why I am feeling sad but usually the visits are cheery and we feed the ducks/fish there. I just feel I should take them as I don't want her to be forgotten and it introduced them to a very watered down idea of death. Maybe I'm wrong to take them. I have no idea. Therefore I am not much use in answering your question. Sorry

I agree SIL shouldn't be forced to go, or to take her new baby and I'd also worry that it'd make PIL feel worse to see a brand new and (hopefully) very healthy baby at the graveside of a baby they'd lost.

I'd also say that SIL has an absolute right to ask BIL not to go on this occasion if she doesn't feel up to being left for most of a day only a week or so after giving birth. BIL's (aha her DH's) priority should be his wife and brand new baby and ensuring their health and happiness and PIL should respect that - especially so soon after the birth.

Once a year? I would go and bring my baby if it made my MIL happy. My friend lost a baby this year and I know how important it is to her that the baby is not forgotten. He is party of their family even though he died shortly before he was due to be born.

I don't think that visiting the grave of family members is morbid, for some people it's very helpful, they feel some sense of that person's presence and it's an acknowledgement of their existence when life is otherwise moving on.

I also don't think it's particularly problematic for young children to visit a grave unless their are other issues. Seeing an adult cry every now and then is probably a good thing, and death is sad. I certainly cannot see any reason why it would be a problem for a baby.

I do think it is unreasonable to expect a very new mum to do anything very much or to take a very young baby on a long car journey, but I do think it unreasonable to say 'no never' to something that obviously means a lot to someone in their sadness and has really relatively little cost (one day a year).

The grandchildren won't be grieving. They will know that their grandparents suffered a loss and that they are giving them a little bit of support on a special day when their grandparents are sad. Why is that so terribly problematic?

I think it is very dependent on people's attitudes to death and cemetaries. I've personally never felt the need to visit the grave of my parents or grandparents, and I didn't want or need to see and sit with them after their death. I tend to be of the opinion that the person's spirit is no longer there and the physical body is no longer relevant (it's not a religious belief, just how I feel). I tend to get more emotion from wearing a piece of jewellery that they owned, or having a piece of art that they made in my home.

Grief is a very personal thing, and I'm not sure I would feel comfortable with MIL wanting to make this a family day out like you would go to the zoo or a picnic in the park. I've never even been comfortable with the collective grief of funerals. That said, if it were something that was very important to MIL and BIL then I would attend and be respectful, because sometimes you have to do things which are not comfortable to you or which you wouldn't do yourself in order to show your support for someone. It's not going to hurt a young baby to stand in a cemetery for fifteen minutes. I think your SIL needs to examine whether it is her feelings about the situation that is causing her to say no, or whether her new child is a convenient excuse for ending this tradition.

Are the PIL self-obsessed twats in general, OP? Because this is selfish, self-obsessed behaviour - to refuse all compromise and be making demands and trying to emotionally blackmail a woman who has just given birth FFS.

I also agree with the very good point made upthread- what would the PIL do if a new grandchild had been born on the relevant day?

Probably the best solution for the moment is for your BIL to say to his parents that SIL and the new baby are not up to the journey and therefore won't be coming - and for next year, you and your DH can back SIL up as you don't take your DC.

For comparison ( of sorts) on the anniversary of my father's death I go with my mum, brother and SIL to the crematorium; we leave flowers then we go and have a nice lunch together, but I don't take DS along. To be fair he's usually at school as so far the anniversary has always been a weekday, but I don't plan to take him along for a year or two yet.

Thank you, Solid. Rest assured things have been sorted and smoothed over. DH had a talk with BIL and explained to him how fragile SIL is at the moment and she is in no way trying to undermine their grief but she isn't up for making the trip with a baby who is BF and so young but plans might be arranged for next year if things go well. BIL has agreed on his older brother's request to explain this to PILs as gently as possible.

I'd also like to point out that I did not say this was morbid or any bring of the kind, what I did say was we all have different opinions and experiences of it. Some see it as hiding grief, others see it as shielding children, some see t as being open, others see it as not needed, some think it doesn't have any affect on children, something it does. We're all different on this aspect but we're not wrong so I need to say once again, ladies. Thank you.

I agree with solid, as I do often.

No one has the right to demand another fully fledged adult do anything they are not comfortable with.

I'm disappointed that yet again a new mum had to learn pdq that they have to stand up for themselves having been put in a really crappy situation by an overbearing and self serving set of PIL.

If your sil doesn't want to go, or doesn't what her child to go, that really IS her choice. PIL have to respect this and not pressure anyone to do that they want them to do. It doesn't work like that.

Let me get this right, they want to take a newborn baby to visit the grave of a new born baby?

I'm in the camp that says as long as a child is old enough to understand then they can go to a funeral of someone they know. A new born doesn't understand and I fail to see what MIL gets out of it.

Good God, it's a trip to a graveyard once a year and people are making allegations that the ILs are being overbearing etc.

They are clearly comforted by the fact that their dead baby will not be forgotten even after they themselves pass on.

How can it hurt to do this? It would be selfish and churlish of your SIL to refuse! It's ONCE a fucking year.

The ILs are trying to make someone do something that that don't want to.

That's not on!

The baby won't be forgotten after they die as Ops husband & BIL will be there to remember.

Whether it would carry on after that is up to OPs children & BILs children.

But making SIL take her newborn isn't going to make it happen!