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?

@hearhoovesthinkzebras also having my
Mother there never pushed my husband out. It's not mutually exclusive to have help at the expense of pushing the baby's father out.

Depends on the dynamics. Absolutely not about maternal v paternal grandmother. Who will help/support new mum and baby? And who is there as a bystander for hugs and photos? The latter is at the back of the queue but no less important.

You clearly have never had a birth like I had.

Really? I was in ITU post emergency caesarian for pre eclampsia. My baby was in SCBU.

My second baby I had a post partum haemorrhage and lost two pints of blood.

I think I had pretty traumatic births both times. Leaving my son in the hospital when I was discharged is the worst thing that I've ever had to do in my life. Travelling back every day whilst recovering from a section and severe pre eclampsia was horrendous. We still managed between my husband and myself just as we've managed during other episodes of illness or surgery.

Lovely to see a nice bit of competitive "my births were so much worse than yours and I managed without my mum"

@hearhoovesthinkzebras so you didn't have a newborn and a recovery at home. Maybe that's why you didn't need the help of someone. I imagine you weren't awake doing night feeds whilst your baby was in the hospital. You shouldn't try to make people feel bad for having the help they thought they needed. What do you gain from doing that?

Also maybe you aren't fortunate to have the relationship I have with my own mother @Hearhoovesthinkzebras

Also I think lots of us can 'manage' but why 'manage' when there's an option to thrive

The needs of the mother take priority - and that goes as much for who she doesn't want there as who she does.

No, it's not fair - biology isn't fair. Just as the father could, if he wished, decide as they arrived at the hospital for the birth that he'd changed his mind about having a baby and disappear never to be seen again. Not an option for the pregnant woman.

It is just not equal, not even approaching a million miles of equal and the reasons for that should be absolutely clear. She's given birth. She's been through a massive physical and emotional event and is vulnerable, sleep-deprived and trying to breastfeed.

The father's role in the first weeks is to support and protect the mother. His needs, emotional too, come SECOND. Because the mother's emotional as well as physical health is tied far far more directly to the baby's wellbeing than his. And the baby is the important one.

Putting an emotional need of the father before one of the mother is detrimental, ultimately, to the baby. We've all heard the tales of the family where the deluge of inlaws being given the green light to hog baby, interfere and generally upset the mother have led to PND/breastfeeding failure. The father has put his wellbeing - either for emotional support he wants or his wishes not to have to stand up to his family - above that of the mother. Wrong.

And it's about relationships too. If you're a bossy interfering inlaw, then of course your DIL won't want you in her face when she's just given birth. It's about one of the most intensely personal life events you can have. And the DH/DP who forces that for his own sake is stupid, really - there's more than one post above which details how that dynamic meant the final nail in the coffin for any inlaw relationship. I know one person who felt so violated and disrespected by her MIL post-birth that the rift has never healed. If MIL (and her DH) had shown her more genuine care and respect during that time, she'd have a closer relationship with her grandchild. She never will because her DIL hates her.

The mother comes first for all sorts of practical, emotional and moral reasons and only a truly selfish father would genuinely think differently.

I can’t believe the amount of grown women on MNs who are so enmeshed with their mothers.

To all the posters who needed their mums at the birth/directly after, how do you cope with other challenges in life?

My DH and I, like many posters have already said, didn’t need either of our mums after the birth of DS. Why would we? We are two capable adults.

I definitely know many women who relied on their mums heavily after the births of their children, with some present at the births, but they are all from very enmeshed families. I really feel for their DH’s (and IL’s). I couldn’t imagine being pushed out from the first few days/weeks of my child’s life.

The mother comes first for all sorts of practical, emotional and moral reasons and only a truly selfish father would genuinely think differently

I think this is why so many men just go along with having their MIL’s at the birth and around so often afterwards.

Why should a father who is able and willing to look after his wife/partner and especially his newborn child, be pushed aside in favour of his MIL?

I would have loved either my mum or mother in law postpartum. Unfortunatly neither was ever an option. My mother passed away while I was pregnant and MIL lives on the other side of the world.

Your friend should do what she feels comfortable with, not what we all feel she should or should not do.

*I can’t believe the amount of grown women on MNs who are so enmeshed with their mothers.

I can’t believe how hysterical you’re being. Having your mum around for a few days after birth doesn’t mean you’re ‘enmeshed’. I appreciate some people have very unhealthy relationships with their parents and maybe that’s colouring your perspective, but to assume that having a parent on hand to help means that you have some kind of unhealthy dependency is totally unjustified.

To all the posters who needed their mums at the birth/directly after, how do you cope with other challenges in life?

I’m not sure to be honest because none of the challenges I’ve faced so far in my life have required me to go through hours of gruelling labour which might lead to tearing, birth injury or surgery, which I will have to recover from while also keeping a newborn baby alive. Not sure my other challenges like ‘appendicitis’ really compare.

My DH and I, like many posters have already said, didn’t need either of our mums after the birth of DS. Why would we? We are two capable adults.

Good for you. People doing things differently or feeling differently from you doesn’t make them wrong, and it doesn’t make them incapable adults. You are being hideously judgmental, to the point that it would be funny if it wasn’t harmful.

I definitely know many women who relied on their mums heavily after the births of their children, with some present at the births, but they are all from very enmeshed families. I really feel for their DH’s (and IL’s). I couldn’t imagine being pushed out from the first few days/weeks of my child’s life.

Maybe your nasty habit of making unjustified and wildly exaggerated judgments on other people’s lives is colouring your perception of this...?

I can’t believe the amount of grown women on MNs who are so enmeshed with their mothers.

Erm, I'm close to my mother (and my sisters). I'm not "enmeshed" with them.

This country has such a fucked up attitude to extended family, it is seriously sad. My husband's family don't have any kind of connection with each other - they didn't raise their children to discuss emotions or display physical affection or support one another - and as a result none of them are close as adults and they stick to their own little nuclear family units. It is incredibly sad. My husband always says my family - big and close - was a revelation to him. It was brilliant for both of us having my mum and my sisters around after our son was born. It takes a village.

[quote heartbrokenfool]@hearhoovesthinkzebras so you didn't have a newborn and a recovery at home. Maybe that's why you didn't need the help of someone. I imagine you weren't awake doing night feeds whilst your baby was in the hospital. You shouldn't try to make people feel bad for having the help they thought they needed. What do you gain from doing that? [/quote]
What are you talking about? My first baby came home when he was two weeks old, at what would have been 37 weeks gestation - that's a newborn. Travelling to the hospital everyday whilst recovering from a c section was far harder than recovering at home from a vaginal delivery.

My second baby was born at term and we came straight home. That's newborn. That time my dh had to go away for work when she was four days old so I had a toddler and a newborn, on my own and was recovering from a post partum haemorrhage.

Just because I managed without having my mum into help doesn't mean that I had it easy.

*I imagine you weren't awake doing night feeds whilst your baby was in the hospital."

Yep you're right. Being separated from my baby because I was in ITU and he was in SCBU and then having to leave him in hospital was so much easier than having to get up to do night feeds. Thinking about it now I'm so grateful for that time when I didn't have him with me and we thought one or both of us might die.

Personally I always assume that posters sneering at those of us who wanted our mums around after having a baby have shitty relationships for whatever reason with their own mothers, and feel sorry for them accordingly.

You can't beat a good mother/child relationship. I wish my DH was close to his own mother, but they're not that kind of family.

@NowImLivinInExeter

Personally I always assume that posters sneering at those of us who wanted our mums around after having a baby have shitty relationships for whatever reason with their own mothers, and feel sorry for them accordingly.

You can't beat a good mother/child relationship. I wish my DH was close to his own mother, but they're not that kind of family.

If my children aren't able to function as adults without my presence then I will have considered my self a failed parent.

That is the function of a parent - to make yourself redundant.

If my children aren't able to function as adults without my presence then I will have considered my self a failed parent.

Well I can easily function without my mother. I just prefer to have her there if I can because I love her. What a completely bizarre thing to say .

@NowImLivinInExeter

If my children aren't able to function as adults without my presence then I will have considered my self a failed parent.

Well I can easily function without my mother. I just prefer to have her there if I can because I love her. What a completely bizarre thing to say .

Why is it bizarre?

You're saying you want your mum there because you love her, not because you need her - what's different about the dad wanting his mum there then, because he loves her?

I just really don't understand this. If a man wanted his mum to come into the home he shared with his wife and cook his dinners or lay his.pyjamas out and run him a bath after he had surgery can you imagine the comments? But I guess everyone on here supports that? If your dh has surgery you'll happily let your mil move in for two weeks not take care of him if that's what he wants? If so, great.

If my children aren't able to function as adults without my presence then I will have considered my self a failed parent.

That is the function of a parent - to make yourself redundant.

God, this is so cold. I’m so glad my husband and I both have happy, warm, loving relationships with our parents.

Erm I would be happy to have my MIL there. She didn't want to come. I find it incredibly sad that DH and his sister aren't close to their parents.

@zscaler

If my children aren't able to function as adults without my presence then I will have considered my self a failed parent.

That is the function of a parent - to make yourself redundant.

God, this is so cold. I’m so glad my husband and I both have happy, warm, loving relationships with our parents.

I have loving, warm relationships with both of my children. If they were married, or in a relationship, though I wouldn't be usurping the role of their partner and I certainly wouldn't infringe on the partner's relationship with their baby. Who would do that?

I just really don't understand this. If a man wanted his mum to come into the home he shared with his wife and cook his dinners or lay his.pyjamas out and run him a bath after he had surgery can you imagine the comments? But I guess everyone on here supports that? If your dh has surgery you'll happily let your mil move in for two weeks not take care of him if that's what he wants? If so, great

Exactly this.

I'd say it's the mothers preference and every mother is different. With my first dc my mother and grandmother were present. With my second dc my friend was with me ( she had lost a baby recently and had asked ) and my aunt ( my mother was on the motorway trying to get to me)
I've been in with friends and watched friends children to ensure their husbands could be present.
I think if you have a good relationship with the child's father then it should be him.
My friend had her baby 3 weeks ago and only 1 named person could go in, but not into the ward after. Her MIL has been great as she lives near but her parents haven't seen the baby other than in a camera as they live in Ireland.

I’m not sure to be honest because none of the challenges I’ve faced so far in my life have required me to go through hours of gruelling labour which might lead to tearing, birth injury or surgery, which I will have to recover from while also keeping a newborn baby alive. Not sure my other challenges like ‘appendicitis’ really compare

And I’m being hysterical?

Surely your husband/partner as a capable, functioning adult, can keep the baby alive whilst your recover. That’s his job, as the other parent. It’s not your mother’s and it’s disgraceful that fathers are pushed aside to keep their MIL’s happy.