Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

DD friend's mum not picking up the phone..

621 replies

lunakitty2609 · 09/03/2018 22:25

So my Dd (9) is staying the night at her friend's house for the first time. The parents of the friend know this is her first time away. I tried texting friends mum at 8.30pm to make sure dd was okay, no reply. I have since tried phoning 7 times in 20-minute intervals, still nothing... Who does that? AIBU??

OP posts:
Dragonglass · 13/03/2018 06:46

Also I will get flamed for this but I would actually buy her a phone to take with her on sleepovers/trips away with very clear instructions for use!

Already on it!

Good luck getting her to actually hear it when it rings, or answer it when she'd rather be chatting to her friends

Mobile phones also aren't usually allowed on school/cub/brownie camps either. And some parents have a no phones in the bedroom overnight rule, so may expect the child to leave their phone in the kitchen overnight. A child having a mobile phone is not the answer.

Peanutbuttercups21 · 13/03/2018 06:52

There are def two tribes

The anxious and the laid-back

As a laid back parent, if an anxious patent's child stays with us, I send a little update

But often after dinner my phone is charging in the living room, and 7 missed calls,would have me slightly Confused

GreatDuckCookery6211 · 13/03/2018 07:03

No it's not being laid back. It's called being sensible and rational.

I don't always say yes to a sleepover, if I don't feel comfortable for whatever reason, usually that I don't know the parents either very well or I've never met them ( older siblings drop off ) then they don't go.

I care about my dc as much as the anxious person it's just that can keep things in perspective and not let my mind blow things out of proportion.

There's some worrying posts on here. I hope people reading it will be able to identify that their anxiety isn't healthy and if they haven't already then they get some help for it.

treaclesoda · 13/03/2018 07:13

I'm not laid back at all, my husband is always (gently!) teasing me for being overly cautious with our children, people who know me would describe me as 'a worrier' and in the past my anxiety has been so crippling that I was totally unable to function (I am on long term medication). I am the very opposite of laid back.

I still wouldn't expect an update text from the other parent if I let my child have a sleepover. My rule is simple. Either I trust someone to look after my child or I don't. If I trust them, then they can go to a sleepover and I can expect to hear nothing unless there's a problem. If I don't trust them, or don't know them well enough, then I wouldn't let them go in the first place.

differentnameforthis · 13/03/2018 08:02

She does not owe you an explanation. Not contactable while she has op's dd in her care, yes she bloody does!

theninjabreadma · 13/03/2018 08:05

She already gave an explanation. She didn't see the messages.

bastardkitty · 13/03/2018 08:06

That's not an explanation.

theninjabreadma · 13/03/2018 08:07

How is it not an explanation? Confused She can't respond to messages that she doesn't know she has received.

BarbarianMum · 13/03/2018 08:18

She was contactable. Albeit by the OP going round (or trying a landline?) rather than texting. As this thread shows, there is no commonly agreed standard about how often you have to check your mobile whilst hosting a sleepover.

BertrandRussell · 13/03/2018 08:21

And I still want to know what people think might have been happening to the OP's dd during the radio silence, and why the "Thank Heavens she was all right" sort of messages.

KERALA1 · 13/03/2018 08:22

Totally agree treacle. If there is a whisper of doubt my child ain't going in the first place so I have nothing to worry about.

My children have never had a sleepover with a family we have not been away with socially for a weekend.

BertrandRussell · 13/03/2018 08:23

And yes, I quite understand why the OP was fretting. I might have. Even as well-but I would know I was being completely irrational. It's fine to be irrational about our children-so long as we don't allow it to limit our children or impose it on other people.

BertrandRussell · 13/03/2018 08:25

"My children have never had a sleepover with a family we have not been away with socially for a weekend"
Blimey- really? So no schoolfriends then? Nobody who are your children's friends but not yours?

KERALA1 · 13/03/2018 08:30

They are their school friends. We are friends with their parents. Everybody's happy

BertrandRussell · 13/03/2018 08:35

Unless your children are extremely small, that's just bonkers! They aren't allowed to go to a birthday sleepover unkess you have been for a weekend away with the parents??

TheMythicalChicken · 13/03/2018 08:37

I would have been going bonkers. It is completely inconsiderate not to have her phone on and within earshot whilst she was in charge of another person's child.

KERALA1 · 13/03/2018 08:40

Yes of course they are allowed! I didn't say they weren't allowed. But looking back and thinking about it the only sleepovers they have wanted to have are with their best friends and we are friends with those kids parents. We all met when kids were young we were all new in town at the same time so kids all at school together. Just luck really.

GnotherGnu · 13/03/2018 08:43

It really isn't, MythicalChicken. Why would you assume that the parents of a child visiting for a sleepover must be contactable without delay at any given moment? What difference would it make to your child if you can't phone their hosts at will? Aren't they allowed to cook, entertain and supervise the children, watch TV, go the loo, have a bath etc without being chained to their phone?

Lovesagin · 13/03/2018 08:44

More like 3 tribes surely? Anxious, the ones who are fine if they can get a quick text and/or know they can get in touch if needed, and the very laid back.

All perfectly fine legit approaches as long as the host parent appreciates it and isn't a knob about it.

I wonder what would happen if the parent hosting the sleepover needed to get in touch with the other parent, but the other parent, being sooooo laid back an chill an all, doesn't bother checking or answering their phone or texts. Is that acceptable? Surely it goes both ways?

GreatDuckCookery6211 · 13/03/2018 08:45

TheMythicalChicken please explain what you would have been going bonkers over.

There's so many posters on this thread who would have been fuming and annoyed but nobody has explained why?

What is it you think would have happened?

HarrietKettle · 13/03/2018 08:47

I'd be going 'bonkers' if you'd entrusted your child into my care and then proceeded to freak the fuck out about it as I wasn't glued to my phone while said child was in my care. It makes no sense.

Lovesagin · 13/03/2018 08:47

See Kerala that's interesting to me, I'd be perfectly fine letting DS sleepover at a kid who's parents I only really knew from the school gate, I personally think it's over protective to only allow sleepovers if the parents are good friends.

Funny isn't it? One person's anxious and overprotective is another person's perfectly fine.

TheMythicalChicken · 13/03/2018 08:49

I like to know where my DC are and that they're safe. I would have been worried sick if I couldn't get hold of the mother. The reason is that EVERYONE has their phone on them ALL THE TIME. Especially - one would imagine - if they were looking after someone's else's child.

I therefore would have worried that there had been an accident or some other calamatous reason why she wasn't answering the phone.

PS: I know 'calamatous' isn't a word, but I couldn't find another one I wanted to use more.

Lovesagin · 13/03/2018 08:52

I do think that's an unwritten rule, or it should be, it is with my DC and their friends, you host a sleepover/playdate, and send your child to another's home, you should check your phone, not have it glued to your hands, as there is a middle ground.

Plenty of reasons, some over the top granted, but plenty of normal ones have been given as to why this is a good, sane, normal, courteous idea.

LimonViola · 13/03/2018 08:52

The reason is that EVERYONE has their phone on them ALL THE TIME.

What? No. That's simply not true. You're extrapolating from your own experience to everyone else.

"calamatous" isn't a word you're right, but calamitous is and is exactly what you were looking for Wink