MIL says she doesn’t want baby at funeral but DH does

[KristinaYang]

FIL recently peacefully died, after short illness. MIL was very reluctant to have baby (11 months) round to visit during this time but encouraged older child age 11 to visit lots. We went with the flow and visited with one child, no children, both children etc so a real mix and we thought that was ok-no negative comments.

DH and I had previously noticed that in laws were/are not as interested in baby as they were/are with older child but had put it down to their older age this time round, plus then FIL becoming unwell. MIL has also made some negative comments about baby eg comparing them to sibling and saying they are given too much attention etc. I’m making this point as I wonder if that is clouding our thoughts a bit here?

Funeral is tomorrow. MIL has today said baby is not welcome as she doesn’t want them to steal the show. She is shocked we even considered it.
We don’t have any childcare for baby (though I could stay at home) but then older child would be alone at funeral as DH is reading a lot of the service. Older child was close to FIL and will be upset understandably.

DH says to all go as originally planned but I am on the fence, MIL expressly says no. I feel stuck in the middle, and I really don’t want to make MIL’s day worse, but my loyalty is to my DH. WWYD?

YANBU- Stick with DH
YABU- Follow MIL’s wishes

Completely agree

@beautyisthefaceisee

people will have just tolerated the baby/toddler and made socially acceptable cooing noises out of politeness.

but I can gaurentee they won’t have brought delight and lifted the mood of the whole room. It’s a funeral ffs! Some people in that room will have lost the most important person in their whole life! They are allowed to be sad, a funeral is a sad day!! The mood doesn’t need lightening.

on The day of the funeral, the baby, grandson, OP etc are all irrelevant. The day is about the father in law, closely followed by his grieving widow who will now have to adjust to a life completely changed without him. Have you really no sympathy for her?! Stop being so child centric for just a moment and open your eyes

some people really do think their kids are the centre of the universe and that all other people view them the same way as other people do.

I honestly lol'd at the idea that your mil thinks a baby at a funeral will "steal the show". That's just bonkers.

Genuine question but why is mil's grief worth more consideration than her dh's? After all mil knew him x years of her life. Dh knew him his entire life...

At last, the voice of reason. Great, compassionate and insightful post.

@dudsville

she means disrupt the ceremony. Which there is a fair chance of.

@Cameronnorrieisabitofalright

because at this stage of life, DH very much has his own life. He has a wife and kids to go home to after the funeral. Mother in law will go home to an empty house. Dh’s life will go on relatively unchanged , mother in laws will be turned upside down and will be far emptier.

can you really not comprehend that??

Because it’s her husband. The person with whom she likely spent her entire adult life and with whom she created a lifetime of shared memories which are now only appropriate to her. Because she hasn’t just lost her husband, she’s lost the life she knew and the future she thought she had. Because she’s lost love and companionship and comfort. Because DH will go home to his wife and children after the funeral - he still has all the things MIL has lost. MIL will go home to start her new life alone. Your question might be genuine, but do you not think it a bit ill considered ?

I would have thought that any rational, compassionate and thinking person would have understood by now that MIL is in the throes of grief, isn’t thinking straight, is possibly relying on medication to help her through this, and absolutely cannot be relied on to articulate what she means to the satisfaction of MN. By ‘stealing the show’ she meant taking the focus off her husband - around whom the whole event is planned. It’s not rocket science, it just requires the application of common sense and compassion.

Funerals are not places for babies and young children anyway

They can be, but only if the prime mourners actively want them there. My MIL adored children, and at her funeral my SIL and her cousin who was brought up by MIL asked that my toddler DGD (MIL's DGGD) be brought into the ceremony rather than looked after outside. The funeral was a celebration of the most wonderful and caring person and wasn't depressing at all. My GD's presence was absolutely fitting for the funeral of someone who adored her GCs beyond measure.
My son in law sat at the back with her and took her out at the first sign of her making a sound.

I don't think there should be a blanket view that it's inappropriate, but it is absolutely down to the main mourners. And in the case of the OP, what MIL wants is what should happen.

^Funerals are not places for babies and young children anyway.^

They can be, but only if the prime mourners actively want them there.

Of course they can depending upon the family and the culture.

People have similar attitudes towards DC at weddings, some people agree another would disagree.

It is a personal choice.

Here in Ireland, children of the family are expected to attend funerals, inc. babies so I find the idea that “it’s not the place for them” very strange indeed.

Open caskets at the Removal are also the norm so most children will have seen a few dead bodies by the time they’re adults and will simply accept it as an entirely normal part of the process.

I think the OP’s compromise is a fair one but her DH definitely needs to address the weird relationship with his mum and the children at some point in the not too distant future. She can’t be allowed to treat the 11yr old better because she won’t acknowledge the baby. That has to be discussed and not ignored using the excuse that she’s grieving.

This. It's the cult of the child and you see so much of it on MN. Everything must revolve around the children, even when someone's just lost their life partner, even to the point where MIL's being criticised for not putting her son's/grandchildren's comfort above her own. It's really no wonder some kids grow up as entitled as they do.

I also think there's more than a whiff of ageism about this thread, what with some of the things pps have said about the MIL. Some of the comments that have been made are nothing short of disgusting.

completely agree

No I can’t. You seem to have a very idealistic view of the relationship between spouses and that it’s bond is stronger than that between parent and “child” even if that child is 40, 50 or even 70
in my experience many spouses “move on” form loosing their partner relatively quickly and find new partners. Admittedly Especially men.

why do people like you insist in prioritising love on a ranked scale irrespective of individual circumstances. All family members who loved the person who died will feel their grief in their own way and express it in their own way. No one should ever try to prioritise whose grief is most worthy

I'm glad you've managed to come to a compromise. In the future as your baby grows hopefully she will be a comfort to her gm who'll come to love her and enjoy watching her grow

@EmilyBolton

because at this stage of life, DH very much has his own life. He has a wife and kids to go home to after the funeral. Mother in law will go home to an empty house. Dh’s life will go on relatively unchanged , mother in laws will be turned upside down and will be far emptier.

can you really not comprehend that??

This thread is silly. Terms like 'prime mourners' being thrown around. MIL has unfairly singled out baby. Maybe FIL would have liked the baby there who knows? No one would care if the baby did cry. Yes some people do think their kids are centre of the universe, but people also have main character syndrome themselves.

The people that mind don't matter, and the people that matter don't mind.

I'd be tempted to stay home with baby and let MIL have her day exactly how she wants it, just because it's wouldn't be worth my time or stress to do otherwise. Then ad a family you can all go to his grave site one day, minus MIL, and celebrate him together, baby and all.

Basically, MIL is creating an issue where there isn't one. And if you go against it you'll be the bad guy.

That was her life partner that is why. If you want to make it a competition over who has known each other longest well she has known him for longer than he has. The majority of us are going to lose our parents as it is the natural order, it is inevitable. We won’t all experience the grief of losing a partner, I’m hoping I never will. If my husband died tomorrow it will be far more traumatic for me than the death of my parents was.

She trumps him. A baby does not need to go to a funeral and she doesn’t want a baby there. She is chief mourner and has the right to say this.

I think “stealing the show” is the wrong expression that people have jumped on in order to invalidate her feelings. I buried somebody I have known my whole life last year and I definitely would not have wanted an eleven month old there causing distractions. I don’t want to lighten the mood, I want to be sad and say my goodbyes in peace.

TBH I don't think it's even their issue to resolve. Saying 'I'm not being mean' before saying you have no interest in your other grandchild, doesn't automatically make it not mean. I think carry on visits with baby as normal, but it's not their responsibility to resolve MIL's unwarranted issues with baby. Sounds like it would just lead to hurt feelings. It also seems like this MIL doesn't particularly care too much for other people's feelings. E.g. saying the other grandchild MUST go. What if he didn't want to?

People have similar attitudes towards DC at weddings, some people agree another would disagree. It is a personal choice

Absolutely - except that too often when the bride and groom / chief mourner / whoever have made that choice it's not respected and you get people wanting to "clarify" whether it applies to their child, expecting exceptions and even, god help us, folk like a poster last week who tried to bribe a B&G with money to invite their child

Whatever happened to normal good manners and either accepting an invitation in all its parts or simply politely refusinng?

From an above post by LetsPlayShadowlands. 'The people that mind don't matter...' That surely qualifies as the most moronic and insensitive comment I have seen on this thread.
If the day ever comes when you have to say farewell to your life's companion, let's hope there's a halfwit with a screaming brat at the funeral insisting that you don't matter either

But all of us have lived in grief, of some form. Every one of us. Nobody is any better or worse than anyone else.

It's an attitude that doesn't sit right because of the wording, and I can see where P are coming from.

the 'screaming brat' is the woman's grandchild.

Related or not, screaming brats have enough places to cause disruption without doing it at funerals too. Having six GC myself, I know what they're like

Do you have a sensible friend, or other relative who could mind the baby during the service, so you can attend at least that?

That's what some of my extended family did at my dads funeral. My cousin (who was close with my dad) wanted to attend the service and focus on saying goodbye to him, without worrying what their toddler was doing. So they drafted in a willing FIL to sit outside and watch the toddler for half an hour, while the parents could sit in the service.
That FIL, bless him, then just handed the toddler back to her parents and went home (he didn't know my dad, mum doesn't think they ever met, apart from maybe at the wedding).
I've always thought what a kind thing it was to do. He has a bit of a reputation in the family for being a tough nut to crack, but he showed a really kind side there.