Who was being unreasonable? (Grim content)

[MyFaveTattoo]

Ok, a few points for context. Since breast cancer and chemo, my periods are erratic and irregular. In my house, we have a rule, that between 23:00, and 06:30, unless poo (or obviously illness, vomit etc), no flushing. Also, I sleep walk, regularly and without warning.

It's school holidays here, so DH goes to work around 06:20, and I don't get up until 07:00-07-15 with the four DCs.

I got up, as usual at around 07:15, went for a pee, settled the littlies with breakfast, then sat down with a cuppa and my phone. About 20 or so minutes later, I went to the bathroom for a quick shower, only to discover that I was saturated through with blood. Through my undies, jammie bottoms and dressing gown. A bit had also got on the lounge!

Obviously, I cleaned myself and everything else up, but when DH got home from work, I told him about said saturation and he said "yeah, when I got up for work, the toilet was full of blood".

I was bloody appalled!! I pointed out to him that I have never, never left blood in the toilet, and that he should have let me know because it was so out of character for me that I must have weed in my sleep, but he said that because I must have got up during the night, he thought I just hadn't flushed.

We are pretty open, so surely he should have mentioned the blood in the loo, given that it was so out of character for me to leave it there? He says that because he thought I wouldn't flush during the night then it was reasonable for him to have assumed that I knew I was bleeding.

So who is in the right please?

He is

So, did you want him to wake you up to tell you that you had started your period?

I don't get the argument at all. Why would either of you be wrong? What's to be wrong about?

I am amazed you where up for 20 mins and didn't notice such a heavy bleed.

But imo he wasn't being unreasonable. Sounds like he just did the mature thing of flushing and forgetting rather than making a big deal of things

What a strangely pointless argument He was only following the weird no flushing rule surely?

I don't follow.. what are you mad at him for?

He assumed you hadn't flushed the toilet because of your rule and that you knew about the blood? He is not BU.

I don't think either of you are in the wrong, tbh. It doesn't sound as though he was disgusted to find blood in the loo and it may not have occurred to him to realise he's never found the toilet in that state before.

Rather him taking it in his stride than my mother who would, in similar circumstances, have come through to me shouting about the state of the loo and making me go and flush it (at whatever time of the morning).

I would have thought the same as him, that you hadn't flushed on purpose.

I thought you were going to say he went off the deep end because there was blood / bloody paper in the loo, despite your no flushing rule!

In the nicest way possible YABU.

Your DH hasn't done anything wrong

I don't know whether either of you was being particularly unreasonable, but I really think you need to abandon the "no flush" rule, if this is the consequence of it.

I would assume he was trying to be sensitive and was actually being quite 'grown up' by not making a big deal of it.

He's right

What a pointless argument.

"He says that because he thought I wouldn't flush during the night then it was reasonable for him to have assumed that I knew I was bleeding."

He is right. Surely it would be most unusual for someone to go to the toilet and not notice they are bleeding?!

In the nicest possible way op, I don't think your dh was in the wrong. It is not worthy of an argument either.

He is right.

Given how unusual it was, I would have expected him to give me a shake and let me know that he had noticed I was bleeding.

It's not caused any major arguments, just a disagreement and I feel a bit humiliated.

There is no argument here surely? Would you have preferred him to wake you up at 6am when he got up and noticed, marched you into the loo, and made you flush before he had a wee? Surely he was just saying "yeah, I noticed, no big deal", unless you're saying he was utterly revolted, gagging, making a ginormous fuss about it?

Sorry, but I think that you are BU. I've not heard of anyone peeing in their sleep before, so I wouldn't assume that was what had happened. I would just think you'd not flushed - I wouldn't wake you up.
How did you not notice when you went for a pee at 7.15 when you first got up though? Surely it would have been on the toilet paper?

I don't understand what the point is? You have a rule (I guess your flush must be pretty loud as we've never had such a rule!) Where you don't flush during the night. So why would he assume that you didn't know you'd come on? I feel like you're blaming him for something that he had no control over?! Poor guy probably feels like he can't do right from wrong. Maybe he didn't want to wake you up really early..

flowery - not unusual for me not to notice some things during the night, owing to my sleepwalking.

You are having a fight about nothing.

Surely him waking you and therefore making a point of it would be more humiliating?

I feel a bit humiliated

Do you feel a bit embarrassed, or do you feel that he humiliated you? This might seem like semantics, but there is a big difference. I think you just feel a bit about it. He responded in the least humiliating way possible - he didn't bring it up at all, until you did, and then all he said was "yeah, I noticed" rather than pretending that he hadn't noticed. It would have been much more cringe if he had woken you up to tell you, or left a note on the kitchen table before he went out!