Two sets of in-laws and newborn

[user1466488499]

Hello, please be gentle with me, first timer here! We're expecting our first child next month, I'm excited, nervous, looking forward to it and also scared.

DHs parents are divorced, both re-married, with no other children so hubby is an only child and our child will be the first grandchild. This is where the issue starts with both sets of in-laws. They're mid-70s, have to be the centre of attention, don't help around the house and expect to be waited upon and taken out for meals. Luckily they live about 300 miles away so don't see them too often.

I made it clear to DH ages ago that I wanted our first 2 weeks out of hospital when he's on paternity leave to be just the three of us to help us bond as a family unit and get to know our child. I want to make sure I'm breastfeeding correctly and know I may well be sore and tired after giving birth.

Now FIL and wife have announced they're not happy about waiting to see their grandchild - problem is that because they live so far away, they'll want to stay for at least a couple of nights and they won't help out whatsoever. DH will spend his time running around after them rather than bonding with his child. As they have no experience with babies, I'll have to keep a close eye on them as well as trying to recover from the birth. I don't want my baby handed around like a plaything to entertain them. I have explained to them how newborns are very sensitive and could they wait a while before visiting but they've spent the weekend moaning to my husband who is now taking their side and says I am being unreasonable. The tiger mum inside me wants to protect and care for my little one and keep him close, not handed around to lazy in laws who won't do anything to help out. The only person I would appreciate around in the early days is my mum who will cook, clean, go to tesco etc. and be invaluable. DH says that if his parents aren't allowed to visit straightaway then neither should my parents - not getting the point that his lot are lazy and expect to be waited upon and stay for days whereas my folks will stay for an afternoon or one day and be brilliant.

Help, maybe I am being very selfish but I don't want my new baby handed around like a bag of sweets to lazy in laws who know nothing about babies and who won't help us....aargh! This is a recipe for disaster when i consider how raging hormones will be and sleep deprived after the birth....

...so many women have been socialised not to put their needs first and birth has become this ordinary everyday thing you have to get on with and make like its no big deal. It's sexism hitting women when they are at their most vulnerable...

No. Pragmatism. Also an element of trying to reassure someone who seems to feel she will be in pieces and fragile after The Event. Many women don't feel vulnerable or fragile afterwards. It's not everyone's normality. OP needn't assume she's going to feel vulnerable as she may but equally - she may not.

Also, it's interesting the stuff about people in their 70s being clueless about parenting. Both my parents were born in the 1920s, and both from very different backgrounds. My father happily pushed me in a pram, changed my nappies, fed me (bottlefed), etc etc. He also washed up, cooked and cleaned. My mother had a full time job throughout most of her life, and had no intention of being a SAHM. It's not like the cliche younger people think. I doubt I was ever 'left to cry'. I know I was never smacked or hit. Am fairly sure I wasn't on the solids (or vodka) aged 3 weeks. ;o) My parents were neither typical nor atypical. Am sure many here could say the same. Some rather ageist assumptions.

Did you notice that I have said several times that nobody should have anyone staying at their house they don't want?

Confinement is not a modern phenomena, but this 'Special Me' attitude certainly is.
As I said, the difference in attitude to parenting when my son (23) was born compared to when my daughter (12) was born is marked.
I honestly don't know anyone who would ban all visitors apart from their mothers from seeing a new baby for two weeks - it seems to be a very Mumsnet thing.
I think the whole thing is fed by boards such as these which encourage people to outdo each other with how clever they can be.

My mother was nearly 80 when she came to help me when dd was born. I reasonably sure that she didn't give dd vodka, smack her or put her in the back shelf of her car........

Bertrand - I have interpreted it differently because I don't think anyone is arguing seriously for 'no visitors on principle'. Some are saying they would wait a while before seeing difficult people or those whose presence will be a strain and a burden, not a joy. Some are saying they would like to wait until after the birth to see whether they feel up to it. Some are saying they think they'd like a bit of peace and quiet for a few days, and then they'll see. Many have pointed out the difference between short visitors and house guests - I don't think those advocating 2 months without 'visitors' are saying that the mother should be sealed up like an anchorite and see no-one all that time, more like she shouldn't have to worry about overnight guests for a bit. That seems really reasonable.

Nobody is stopping GP's from seeing the baby though - just delaying it.

What's the rush???

I suspect a lot of this is more down to different sets of grandparents competing to be 'first' rather than a genuine desire to see the child as soon as possible.

Oh well, if it's just overnight guests we're talking about then the whole bloody thread's been a complete waste of time!

"What's the rush???"

Because babies are lovely and people are excited.

Well, the overnight stay and the work that entails with guests who insist on being waited on rather than mucking in are a central concern of the OP, so perhaps people were perhaps responding to that?

If you can't be 'special me' after you've just given birth for crying out loud...

"Because babies are lovely and people are excited."

And that trumps the wishes and dignity of a person who has undergone a potentially traumatic medical procedure???

Are we talking about grandparents or children who can't sleep because Santa is coming?

Well, given I have a DS (20) and if ever there is a happy time when he has a child , forewarned is forearmed . No doubt by then I might be allowed to send a card on the child's 18th .

"I honestly don't know anyone who would ban all visitors apart from their mothers from seeing a new baby for two weeks" extenuating circumstances aside Nor do I . Lucky I had Ds before MN .

I suspect a lot of this is more down to different sets of grandparents competing to be 'first' rather than a genuine desire to see the child as soon as possible.

Seriously, does anyone like anyone else in the world anymore, or is the whole world full of miserable self-centred people (both posters and, apparently their entire families) who are only interested in competing with each other?

Or am I the only person who sometimes read MN in ever increasing shock at quite how much no one seems to like anyone any more.

"And that trumps the wishes and dignity of a person who has undergone a potentially traumatic medical procedure???"
And a father showing visitors the baby in the living room is going to impact on that person exactly how?

cathf I too have never met anyone in rl that wants to hide away into some kind of bubble with their baby and not allow visitors. I honestly haven't.
Then again, lots of things I read on MN seem totally alien to my life and of those around me.
'Tis very weird!

YANBU. And I disagree with all this, 'Then you have to apply the same rule to all parents.' Some people impose themselves on others and are twat housepests. Others are helpful and wait to be asked.

Op, yanbu. I didn't have a particularly traumatic birth. Baby was fine, out the next day etc. Even breastfeeding was relatively easy. But 30 stitches and the whole wonderful shock of having a little person to get it grips with was enough for me to put some rules down about visitors. Unless I felt comfortable getting my boobs out or complaining about my stitches in front of them, they weren't coming. AND they had to bring food if they were visiting. It's your baby and you'll never get those first days back with them which hopefully will be as wonderful for you as they were for me and my ds. Do as you please, no compromising.

So new mother has to hide upstairs? Why? It's her home.

All this fuss over a couple of weeks wait.

The world inside my home is going to entirely revolve around my baby, me and the babies father when I give birth.

No apologies.

Since when has relaxing in bed with a cup of tea and a book been "hiding upstairs"?
And do the father's wishes count for nothing?

do the father's wishes count for nothing?

Yes, hadn't you realised that? Because women are the one's who give birth. Don't you remember that big meeting not long after God created the world in 7 days where it was decided that women would carry babies, because the men couldn't be arsed to do it and even though they had the choice to be the ones to be pregnant and give birth, they turned it down?

It's a big global conspiracy and it's why the baby is so much more "mum's" baby than it is dad's baby.

Until they at 5 and the dad doesn't suddenly overnight pull his weight after being elbowed out of the equation for the past few years.

In my house you have to cross the living room to get to the loo and bathroom. Shall I pee in a pot if necessary?

Anyway, it's not the point. The point is, respecting the wishes of someone at a potentially vulnerable stage in their lives. For a couple of weeks. Without implying that the potentially vulnerable person needs to suck it up.

It's a couple of weeks. A couple of weeks which the new mother will never get back and remember forever. It is not forever.

Of course the fathers wishes count - but, like the grandparents, I'm sure he can delay them for a few days.

People are accusing new mothers of being selfish or 'special-me' or whatever, when it's the grandparents here who can't show a bit of patience and maturity and wait for a brief period while the new mother catches her breath if she so wishes.

Compromise somehow, even a bit. Two weeks is an age not to see your first grandchild (and I know of nobody in rl who does this or even thinks it), it must just be a MN thing.

Rainbow and Nancy - we must live in the same world!
A new baby is a special time for the whole family, but it seems to be that some mum's on here are so intent on being the centre of attention, they can't see that.
My ex MIL was a complete pain, but I can honestly say that the thought of keeping her away from her first grandchild never crossed my mind, especially as my mum was in the picture too.
I am sorry, but I think all this 'special bonding time' etc is just attention seeking behaviour even if not deliberate.

am I the only person who sometimes read MN in ever increasing shock at quite how much no one seems to like anyone any more.

No

Or indeed understands being kind is a good thing and often repays itself.

Here's a thing which will probably get me shot down. PILs paid an Unauthorised Access Visit when I was 8 hours after an emergency CS at the hospital. If Im honest, I probably wanted to be alone with DH and DS. I didn't need to be. Once I saw them all together it was lovely. With Dh's (and of course the nurses' ) support the visit wasn't onerous. I still look at the photo of Grandma with new (1st) GC on her knee and smile. This was NOT me rolling over and keeping the status quo/ oiling social wheels as a woman. This was me being part of a bigger family. Had I needed time without visitors we would have had it.

And here's the killer where most will absolutely disagree with me I expect - even on that day it wasn't all about me. Had it needed to have been - yes it most certainly would. It didn't, and it was a lovely family day. It was largely about me, don't get me wrong, and DH , and of course DS obviously most important , but a visit early doors meant so much to them - more than I appreciated.

Other family circumstances apply , this wouldn't work for everyone

And also extenuating circumstances etc.

Cat / pigeons.

Mother's wishes prevail.
Our parents were 300 miles away. They were able to keep away. I don't see why this lot shouldn't either. Of course once you are home and settled they can visit when you say that they can but make them stay in a hotel. If they cannot afford that there is always airbnb etc. No reason they should impose on you. I think our parents came after a couple of weeks, may be a bit more.
With my own new grand child (similarly first on both sides but we live nearer) we did exactly what the parents c hose which was short visits soon after birth and being useful - going out to buy food etc.

You need to start as you mean to go on. This is your family and you must protect it and not give in to wider family. My mother was so good at this - doing what we wanted in the way we wanted not how she wanted and I am trying to be the same in my own turn now. It seems to be working.

Also in my case I was back at work full time and breastfeeding still and expressing milk at work after 2 or 3 weeks. Those 2 or 3 weeks at home with the baby were time I wanted to be alone with the baby, not entertaining people. Also if you want to get used to the baby and how to feed him or her the last thing you want is loads of people around, particularl if you are like I am and adore time alone and never get enough of it.

" Hell is other people" as many of us all know as the old saying goes.