Mothers - who’s is more important?

[MrsRose2018]

Is the first time mothers “right” or “need” to see their mother/have them around post birth more important than the first time fathers?

No MN rage please, I’m not saying I believe this is true, This is just the conversation me and my husband have been having and I’m curious of your thoughts?

@saraclara

However, you are not the person who has just given birth. You are not bleeding, trying to establish breastfeeding, feeling your hormones go haywire, or any of the other things that many new mothers go through. Therefore, you can be expected to sit on your hands for a bit.

I went through all those things. Yet somehow managed to cope with letting the generation above me meet the new member of their family at some point in the first week, both times.

Women have been giving birth for as long as human life has existed. But suddenly it's the equivalent of climbing Everest without oxygen, and it's unthinkable that those who will love that baby almost as much as you, should have an hour or so to meet him/her.

The preciousness is astounding.

I completely, completely agree saraclara. It feels like women are being portrayed as these fragile little things who need to be looked after. It's a bit like the trend of demanding men "look after" their partners when they are having a period - seriously, social media is awash with these videos. It is utterly bizarre. Why have we suddenly decided to portray ourselves as weak little things that need to be looked after?

Both equally important. Why should it be considered any other way? 🤔

Pinkblueberry

Yes, exactly. I'm so glad there are some voices of reason on here.

If the couple have a good relationship and the mother is happy with it I can’t see why the father shouldn’t be at his child’s birth but if it’s a fractious relationship they shouldn’t be there during labour the mother needs to be relaxed and calm. Do believe the mother should get a choice as stress can lead to birthing issues. After birth I also think they should be able to have a say in who they want to visit them and when. My first child I has a very traumatic long labour ending in an emergency section my MIL just turned up in the recovery room with no invitation (she was excited to see her first grandchild) that and other reasons lead to me having the most horrific postnatal depression (spanning 9 years) which lead to me not trusting my MIL around my eldest child I had to go through therapy to sort the things in my head out. My second birth no one was allowed to visit the hospital except my husband and son then when I got home a few days later I decided when/who visited it massively helped in my recovery to point my MIL is also going to help with childcare this time round as I feel she respects my decisions.

Well if my DH had said to me that only his Mum was allowed to visit for the first month, then "allow" my family to visit he would have been told in no uncertain terms where to shove that.

It should be equal.

Unless there is some massive back story I think it's really mean excluding people who only want to share your joy and welcome the new arrival.

I also think it can breed resentment further down the line when you may need them. Be very careful for what you wish for etc.

Sometimes when the mother is recovering after a traumatic Labour/birth pushy grandparents/family members can have huge detrimental effects on the mother’s mental health so think it needs to depending on each individual circumstances 🤷🏻‍♀️

If mums mother sees the baby, while social distancing then MIL should also see the baby. Because of coronavirus and the fact they live 3hrs away they can't stay over so will have to go back but the mums mother being only 15mins away can see the baby every day if she wishes. But saying MIL needs to wait a month is nasty, it's her sons baby too.

I think this is an extreme example.

I wanted my mum around, especially after DDs birth as she was prem & IUGR and it was a c section that followed 3 mcs. As a PP said, the mum's mum will often come to look after their own daughter as well as see the baby.

But MiL was welcome to visit too, and was caring towards me etc. If I had a strained relationship with my MiL maybe i would have felt different.

Completely depends on the MIL and her relationship with her DIL. In the postnatal recovery period the mum's needs trump the dad's. If the new mum believes that MIL's visit would cause additional stress and anxiety then it would be better for mum and baby to delay MIL's visit or at least make it brief. My MIL is a nice lady but she stayed with us for 3 nights and since my DH was back at work I was stuck in the house with her. No attempt to help me with any household jobs, she just wanted to sit on the sofa cuddling my newborn whilst I was sorting out food and drinks. She also tried to come into the bedroom in the middle of the night when DD was crying and I was half naked trying to breastfeed. I still feel angry when I think about it.

I couldn't abide my MIL being here. As pp suggested she would only have been interested in the baby.and would have been demanding tea and food endlessly.

My dm made it more about ensuring I was fed and rested enough to focus on looking after the baby while she picked up everything else that needed sorting after dh went back to work

This depends so much on your relationships, my mother wasn't told about the birth for at least a month after both my children were born. I had enough on my plate without including her.

Assuming there's no massive backstory and general animosity, ideally I'd say both sets of grandparents should see their grandchild as soon as the new mother has recovered and feels up to company. It can be a special time for them all, obviously, grandfathers as well as grandmothers.

But if I had only one person (other than my husband) to visit us soon after I'd given (theoretical) birth, I'd want it to be my mother. I think the person who's given birth deserves to make a few of the big decisions in those first few days, and this is one of them. She's the one whose body has been put through the wringer, so her mother is a more important visitor (assuming she's more comfortable with her own mother).

I think there should be no RIGHTS, or either person.

However, if the birth mother wants her mum to hand, then why not... So long as she doesn't try to take over and remove any control from the other half. As that would be so wrong.

When my fiancee had her daughter, she didn't want anyone else around (staying), particularly the mil, as she knew they'd try to take over everything, and criticise everything.

Plus as.my fiancee put it... I just had me fanny ripped in half, I'm tired, I'm sore, and I'm breastfeeding. I need to get into a routine, and don't need anyone around fussing and taking over, or that would still want to the be the center of attention!

As for RIGHTS, I don't think either has the right, but I do think so long as compatible with new family life, whatever helps the mum is best CHOICE.

There is no right or wrong answer. It depends on the father and the mother, and subsequently the 2 mothers.

As a general rule, the mother’s wishes take priority if you have to choose, she’s the one who’s given birth and she needs care too. Normally( but not always) that would mean her mother.

But of course in more normal times than we currently live in, both pairs of grandparents should be able to see the baby within the first few days,

Odds are that will be her own mum, whose opinion she doesn't have to worry about, and who she won't mind asking to wash her blood-soaked nighties and who will know how she likes her toast.

Multiple ‘blood-soaked’ nighties? A stain here or there maybe, but I think if you’re at home after giving birth and your nightie is soaked in blood and you can’t muster the energy to put on a hot wash (or just stick it in the bin if I’m honest) you’re probably in need of a doctor, not your mum.
Seriously though, I cringe at some of the things people have written on here with regards to needing your own mum essentially nurse you after giving birth. It’s lovely to have help yes, but is it a necessity after a fairly straightforward birth? No. Many new parents don’t have family nearby and manage well - even after a more complicated birth and other children in tow. Anyone in real need of this much molly-coddling off their own mum when you have a partner at home to support you probably isn’t ready to be a parent.

I don’t understand why people are shooting down other woman for needing their mums with them. I had two sons, neither of those births did I require my mum. My third son had a congenital abnormality, with immediate death at birth a very real possibility. I knew when I was told I wanted my mum at that birth with me. Mainly because I knew that my husband would be hesitant to leave me and go with our baby, if we were both to struggle - but also because I was feeling sad, uncertain and I reverted back to who has been the main source of comfort and love in my whole life - my mum. I love my MIL but she has never comforted me, soothed me, seen me vulnerable and naked and so in my mind, her doing so for the first time when I am feeling vulnerable would be ridiculous.

I see nothing silly, or pathetic in wanting your mum with you when you give birth.

Although after birth, I whacked a pad on and got on with it

It seems like this is only relevant if there's disagreement between the couple who've had the baby.
It's only a "right" or a "need" if someone e.g. the father or his mother are challenging whatever the first time mother's wishes are.
Some people might not want either mother around, some might want both if possible. The father might not want his mother around. All depends on their relationships.
I know some people will automatically have one of the grandmother's involved, even stay with them for a bit but I think a lot of people these days don't necessarily have with grandmother heavily involved.

I went through all those things. Yet somehow managed to cope with letting the generation above me meet the new member of their family at some point in the first week, both times.

Women have been giving birth for as long as human life has existed. But suddenly it's the equivalent of climbing Everest without oxygen, and it's unthinkable that those who will love that baby almost as much as you, should have an hour or so to meet him/her.

Do you not see a tiny irony here?

Why is it that suddenly dads are so incredibly vulnerable - as are grandparents - that they cannot resist that 'primal urge' you are so keen to mention? Did something happen to these adults, that they suddenly feel the need to make a woman who's just given birth feel worse about herself?

I think you come across as someone who wants credit for coping after tough births on your own - and you absolutely deserve that credit - but your way of going about it is to insist that if you managed it, everyone else must be the same, and it couldn't possibly be the case that there are alternatives that could be better for all concerned.

I think it’s a matter of opinion, preference and the closeness of both relationships. I had both my mum and partner for the birth of both children.

@Pinkblueberry - but many postpartum women are under care of doctors? It's not rare, is it?

My DP was in hospital with our DD for a few days, but she was still bleeding when she came home. We had lots of appointments and visits for all sorts of reasons. As it happened, DP didn't particularly want her mum, but if she had wanted her and not wanted my mum, it would have been really, really, really low on the list of things I felt strongly about.

I don't get how you could be any other way?

FWIW I only found out a few months ago that my parents never actually got the full story of what happened when DD was tiny, because we were so focussed on DP and DD. Naturally when DP asked me to ring someone with an update, it was her family. So my mum didn't actually know my DD had nearly died, and didn't know some of the other details of what happened.

My mum is the most devoted grandmother you can imagine, and she wouldn't begin to hold it against me, let alone DP, for this. Why would you?

Would say it depends on your relationship status with both. Personally, mum first then MIL straight after.

I think it would depend on the relationship you have with your parents and if it’s you first child. With my first who spent 2 weeks in SCBU I was pretty anxious. My MIL only really cares about her son and was pretty awful the times we saw her ( e.g refusing to follow the rules in SCBU, trying to insist SIL be allowed to see baby instead of my mum - only 2 additional people were allowed in other than babies parents - then once we were home being very dismissive when I asked for advice first day home I panicked when her temperature shot up and asked what she thought I ought to do - her response was ‘it’s your baby’ )
So having her around made things much worse whereas my mother doted on baby and gave me reassurance and advice without taking over.

Although my husband preferred having his mum around to fuss over him as I was busy with baby -
With my second baby I was not as bothered as I was more confident and better able to cope with MIL.