AIBU to feel a bit territorial?

[whyistherenoavocadoemoji]

DH is Swedish and MIL, FIL and SIL are staying with us for 5 days to meet our DD who is 3 weeks old.

DH is very excited about his family meeting the baby which is lovely to see, but since arriving I feel like his family have monopolised the baby and it's making me feel a bit territorial.

For example, DH took his family out for a walk and while they were out I put DD down in her Moses basket. When MIL came in she immediately took DD out of the basket and took her upstairs for a nap in bed with her. AIBU to feel like she should have at least asked?

I am also EBF and the baby often needs feeding every couple of hours but when she cries the MIL or SIL won't hand her back to me until I have to get quite insistent, which makes it a bit awkward.

I don't want to make a scene and I wanted their stay to be nice for DH sake as I know that it is their first grandchild, but I can't stand hearing her cry somewhere in the house and not know why.

Am I being overly sensitive? Quite possible as I am ill and sleep deprived!

don't spoil the precious time they have with her
This point of view makes me livid.
The baby is still part of the mother. No-one else has any 'rights' to her. The 'precious time' they have should be spent in respectfully supporting the mother.

My dd was six months old by her first Christmas. We visited family. She was passed about like a parcel - but a happy, giggling 'parcel' who knew what was going on, that everyone adored her and that she would soon be back with Mummy. Its only a few months before your baby will know and understand, OP. For now, follow your instinct and keep her to yourself.

This would really wind me up.

Don't ask for the baby back, just walk over and take her: "Come to mummy".

And your MIL should definitely not be deciding your baby needs a nap and absolutely should not be putting the baby in the bed with her - I would tell her I don't want this to happen again.

Honestly I would have just gone straight in to the room your MIL was staying in and lifted the baby straight back out the bed and downstairs.

I have boys and I really hope they don't marry a English/British woman if what I read on here is the norm

I have a son and I would fully expect to have my arse handed to me on a plate if I took my 3 week old grandchild into bed with me without checking with its mother first.

timely. I agree wholeheartedly. These early weeks are so important for mother and baby. I understand the desire to hold and cuddle a newborn, but taking her out of her basket would enrage me. Fine to hold her while the OP is doing something else, but this is massively overstepping the mark. She's not a toy.

It may only be five days, but you can be firm without being hostile, OP. This time is precious, you are completely within reason to be annoyed.

Loling at the 'they had to wait three weeks to see their grandchild' posters. Oh the horror! They have to wait while a mum establishes breastfeeding and bonds alone with her newborn in privacy!

How dare she!

The self-important and entitled mummies on this thread are a hoot!!!

Get over yourselves.

Swedish people sound waaaaay more cool. Luckily the child has Swedish genes...

Ollieplimsoles . The other grandparents who live local have already had lots of time with baby. If you are ever lucky enough to be a grandparent you will understand the excitement and longing to meet your grandchild.

She's not a toy.

Yes, this x 1,000! So often in these type of conversations it seems like the babies needs end up coming last. If all the adoring relatives really care about the new baby then they should have no problem putting the baby's need for food or sleep ahead of their desire for admittedly very lovely newborn cuddles.

The grandparents who have travelled some distance to see their new grandchild should be accommodated, frankly. How sad that they are being discussed on an online forum in this way.

As for the toy reference, how patronising.

sandgrown

Yes, and I understand that being a grandparent is a privilege, not a right. So I wouldn't let any 'longing and excitement' get in the way of a newborn's needs.

Cara you're the only patronising one here...

Swedish people sound waaaaay more cool. Luckily the child has Swedish genes...

What a ridiculous thing to say

Cara, why does an adult's decision to make a long journey mean that their desire to hold a baby should "be accommodated" ahead of the baby's need to feed?

Hyperbole to the fore, I see.

Let's try to keep a sense of proportion, shall we?

Well, in what way isn't the OP "accommodating" the GP then? She's objected to them preventing her DD feeding when she's hungry and to a GP taking a sleeping baby from her Moses basket. What do you think the OP should do?

Your in-laws sound a bit territorial themselves. I think it would be fine to ask them not to disturb the baby when she is sleeping, etc. but some of the suggestions on this thread of what to say are ridiculous. No need to make this into a dramatic us vs. them showdown. They are probably thrilled to meet their new grandchild. As you have a good relationship with them, I expect they will respect your wishes if you explain things from your POV.

And congratulations on the birth of your daughter!

CaraAspen ooh you're a goady one .

I keep forgetting that on Mumsnet the father's family are interlopers who should be kept at a distance until the baby is at least 6 months old, when visits will be barely tolerated, and only in homeopathic doses

Maybe this is a cultural thing unique to the UK?

When I visited my newborn grandson (stayed for two weeks as my DS lives abroad) my DIL ( not from UK ) was very surprised that I asked her before picking him up each time and kept looking . She also offered to let me feed him expressed breast milk, and generally made me feel that I was part of the family

I am really surprised so many people think it's ok for someone to get someone else's baby and take them into bed with them. That would be far too risky in my book for such a tiny baby- you can't guarantee she'll co sleep safely. Although SIDS is rare the severity risk is too big not to follow the guidelines strictly.

They can have a relationship with the baby without taking the baby away from her mum or leaving her to cry.

I would have gone ballistic at the bed sharing thing. It is ONLY safe to bed share with a newborn if you are an EBF mother. It is also NOT acceptable that they don't hand your baby back.

Fuck that shit. Five days or not, your baby is a human being, not a toy to be passed around and their needs ignored, and don't even get me started on the bed sharing risks. It doesn't matter if they've travelled from the moon, it is still irrelevant. And describing it to the OP's parents who live locally - they aren't staying with the OP when she's 3 weeks postpartum - the in laws are!

OP, nip this in the bud now. You are bf and there's a 3 week growth spurt. You don't want to miss bf cues because your selfish in laws are only thinking of themselves. Every time your baby so much as moves, offer the breast. Your supply is still establishing itself. Your in laws will interfere with that if their behaviour continues. And 5 days is a long time when a baby is a newborn.

congrats on your baby

'Livid'
'fuck that shit'
'Really wind me up'
'Get my arse handed to me'

Or you could have a chat and talk about it.

The OP wants advice, the gun is being loaded and handed to her. Future loving relationships damaged due to the hysterical advice.

Keep calm it's 5 days. The love the baby, you love the baby, you all love DH. You're tired. Do not get in a row, it's really, really not worth it.

Um....although I'd be pissed off, for 5 days I think I'd go with it and gently try and get your point across. Firstly, baby will pick up on tension and secondly, they are far away normally and soooo excited. In their minds, rightly or wrongly, they want every second they can get.