Grandparents pleasing themselves

[WanderingScotty]

My MIL and FIL look after DS once a week and occasionally at the weekend and have done since he was 1 (now 4.5). (They used to look after him twice a week but we already reduced this because of this issue).

MIL and FIL are fantastic with DS in many ways - he loves spending time with them and they love having him. He’s very lucky to have them.

We have always had some “ground rules” for when they look after him - e.g watch sugar intake, limit screen time etc. It’s not strict, essentially everything in moderation and we just ask them to keep us informed so we can adapt as needed.

MIL and FIL would admit themselves they are not the healthiest of eaters and have no desire to change this. This has caused confusion in the past where they’ve given DS something they think is healthy but we wouldn’t think is (e.g ultra processed, low calorie). FIL also doesn’t take well to being told what to do and can sometimes be a bully (which I admit gets my back up and makes it hard for me to back down). MIL is very unconfrontational and will go along with anything even if she disagrees to avoid an argument (but will make subtle comments so we know if she doesn’t agree).

FIL wants free rein to do what he wishes with DS when they look after him. He wants to spoil DS as that’s “his right as a grandparent”. Mainly this is give him sweets, chocolate, ice cream etc, buy him any toy DS wants etc. Whilst we understand this to a degree FIL looks after DS too often to spoil him as much as he wants to. My mum also looks after DS and it’s not fair on her if she follows what we ask when she too would like to spoil him more. More importantly, this isn’t fair on DS as he gets confused or upset when there isn’t a consistent approach and takes sugar crashes after eating too much sugar.

DS is getting older and is able to understand and verbalise more. This afternoon, he came home and told us he had 3 chocolate treats which they hadn’t told us about. We asked them and they denied this. DS insisted he was telling the truth so we questioned them more.

FIL got defensive asking if we’d been quizzing DS after they’d left - we did but only after DS initially told us. This has led to a heated discussion tonight as FIL says he should be able to do what he wants, he’s raised 2 boys who turned out fine, DS is only with them one day, we’re imagining the sugar crashes etc. He also thinks we should trust them and not question them (despite saying he doesn’t want to go along with what we’re asking).

We have outlined the reasons we’re asking them to follow our rules. Ultimately he’s our son but we have them there because it’s what we think is best for him. MIL is agreeable but FIL is grudgingly backing down. It’ll likely raise its head again in a few months as this seems to be the way it goes.

AIBU for expecting them to follow our wishes or am I getting too bothered about it?

MN is always so ‘let grandparents do what they like’ ‘you’re lucky they want to watch him’ etc, so I did assume most of the comments would be as they are 🙄

You sound pretty flexible and reasonable in your approach to parenting. You haven’t completely banned chocolate but have just asked them to limit it a bit. If they don’t want to watch your child then they don’t have to. They are choosing to as I imagine they want to spend time with him and it’s a joy for them. So they should respect your wishes and not just walk over the top of your rules. Where do we draw the line if we’re saying they can do what they like with him? You grew and birthed the child so YOUR rules, they had their turn to parent 30ish years ago. The same way you will respect your children’s wishes if you ever have grandchildren to babysit

This is an example of the hyperbole I meant.

Not necessarily (re eating 'crap' at home). IME, the less emotional weight and moral value are invested into food (of any type), the less likely a child is to eat them to excess. Plus children are usually very early to work out what rules go in what places.

I get that being healthy is very important, but this is very controlling of people who are being so kind as to look after your child.

Some of my favourite memories of my grandparents is eating my weight in sweets and being spoiled, and I'm now a fit and healthy adult with zero eating issues (albeit now on a v healthy diet!).

The interrogation thing must be awful for your in laws, and being told off like naughty children, I'd offer an olive branch and apologise.

Well, actually my son was like that - he had a sugar-triggered eczema when he was little, so at the age of four he was known to explain to well meaning adults that chocolates or sweets were not good for him and he would prefer to have an apple. Teaching him to say no to treats was the only way we could trust to leave him safely with well-meaning people, who just didn't get it.

He is not a saintly, well behaved child in any other aspect by the way and he'd draw a line at Brussels sprouts, to be fair.

Children get too much sugar these days it's out of control. I remembered when mine were little and one Easter period it got ridiculous with all the people "just giving them a little treat" ie. both set of grandparents, our nanny, school friend at a playdate, school - I even took them to my bootcamp and the instructor had bags of chocolate eggs for them! Then Easter Sunday came and I felt I shouldn't give them any more eggs - I did but was conscious of how much they had already had that holiday!

Yes it's a tricky conversation but it needs to be had and also it's your DH parents so he will need to step up here!

They aren’t your slaves to blindly and unquestionably “follow your wishes”. Looking after the child that much gives them rights too. They are frustrated at being treated like puppets, rightly so. You can’t give them only responsibility and no say.

There can be a compromise but not if they feel that sort of scorn from you that comes across even in your post. Maybe drop the manager telling off an intern tone and see if it helps

But food is only an issue now because since the 1970s, the food companies have been making addictive processed food to increase their profits.

Before then, people just ate basic food and there was no issue. Sweets and chocolates were expensive so most people couldn't afford them (I was born in the 60s and we couldn't afford chocolate and even if we could have my parents were worried about our teeth).

The probem now is that there is crap addictive processed food everywhere. That is why it is a issue.

So they really do exist! Thank you. Must be incredibly rare though because, as i said, I’ve never met one myself. As a child I disliked chocolate but I did like my mum’s homemade cake so I understand that some children might not like all sugary products. Breast milk is sweet so I can’t help but think that, as a species, we are primed to enjoy sugar, even if only in limited quantities.

I also ponder whether cats (I’ve always owned cats and dogs) who get diabetes, because they really can get it, are eating sugar? I’ve always fed mine on a high protein, meat based diet and never given them sweets etc but one of them did become diabetic in later life so whilst I’m not advocating a diet full of sugar for anyone, I think it’s more a case of everything in moderation works for me and mine.

Finally, I wasn’t allowed any sweets etc until I went to school because my parents were, rightly, concerned about my teeth (I was rail thin so my weight was never a concern for them) and then I was allowed a tiny slice of a Mars bar, for example, after my evening meal. Unfortunately, I ended up with anorexia as a pre teen so even the fairly reasonable approach taken by my parents did not prevent health problems for me. Like I said, I still believe everything in moderation to be the best approach because obviously a high sugar diet will undoubtedly lead to health issues but I also believe a diet that’s too restrictive will also potentially lead to disordered eating or health problems. Orthorexia is problematic just like anorexia or bulimia. There’s no one “correct” way but making grandparents or the children themselves see food as either wholly good or bad will cause problems down the line for many children.

Life is too short as someone else has said.
My dad did this with my daughter and he sadly passed away last year.
She adored the sneaky treats and her fun days with him.
At home we don't do what he dis and she new this that is why she loved her grandad days.
It was there time together ❤️
My father is now gone and my daughter misses him but she always smiles and says I bet he still has his lollipops in his pockets for everyone where he is.
Your sons memories of him will be filled with love and fun let them be.

That is 14% of his life that he is being stuffed with rubbish that will kill him.

Yep more hyperbole.

Why is "stuffed with" purely reserved for 'being given chocolate/crisps'? Do kids get stuffed with broccoli? Stuffed with carrots? Though carrots contain sugar, so maybe it applies.

If chocolate one a week kills, then 99% of the population over, let's say, 40 years old, would not be here.

They aren’t your slaves to blindly and unquestionably “follow your wishes”. Looking after the child that much gives them rights too. They are frustrated at being treated like puppets, rightly so. You can’t give them only responsibility and no say. Don’t want to compromise - don’t expect free childcare.

OP pays them to mind the child. She could spend her money elsewhere and not have her child stuffed full of crap.

I haven’t voted because it’s not a black or white situation. I don’t think YABU at all and I don’t understand why a grandparent would want to give their GC unhealthy foods. My mum used to come round with big bars of chocolate and instead of asking me if they could have some, she’d let the DC see it and then say “Go and ask your mum if you can have some.” I mean I’m not an ogre, but they may have already had a treat.

I can’t help thinking that if you said you were feeding your DS treats all day, you’d have received a completely different response!! People are envious of parents with free childcare and that skews the vote.

However, I do still feel that your DS is far far far better off with GP who love him than being at a nursery. It’s only one day and if he’s eating well over the rest of the week I wouldn’t worry.

Well you ARE imagining the 'sugar crashes', exactly as your PIL say, because science says there's no such thing.

https://examine.com/articles/the-myth-of-the-sugar-rush/

It's more likely that any behavioural changes you notice come from your DS responding to the change in environment (from what sounds like more relaxed, permissive grandparent care back to yours) and any tension between the adults that he picks up on.

I think the issue here is that you are seeing the time DS spends with GPs as [free] ‘child care’ and they are seeing this as special time with their GS. If leaving kids with a paid professional I would, of course, expect my preferences to be accommodated. However, GPs are doing you a favour because they want to help you and spend time with their GS - it’s not the same, is it?

With my own kids we didn’t subject the grandparents to any rules - what happens at granny’s stays at granny’s, so to speak. They’d learn soon enough that letting them stay up past a certain hour or feeding them too much sugar/dairy had repercussions and not do it again. They’ve raised kids of their own into fully functioning, successful adults so we trusted them to do as they felt best for their darling GCs. The independent relationship with the GPs is important for developing a sense of self, self esteem and understanding that the ‘world’ outside our home operates differently.

I can understand why inLaws are pushing back. IMHO You would be better letting them do as they wish and offering ‘guidance’ rather than rules - e.g. it’s lovely you want to treat DS, but I find he is easier to manage if he has his sugary treats as part of dinner so you might want to try that if you run into problems.

If observing the rules is more important to you, then you may want to look at using a childminder instead (where, as you’re paying, you have control) and then offer time at weekends for the GPS to take him out for treats. Obviously this will cost you money and eat into your own time with DS - but this way you get to decide where your priorities lie.

Thank you. Talking about serious health issues that make certain foods unsuitable for an individual is a good point. One of my siblings is coeliac and has to stick to rigid dietary rules so I totally get that. I was hospitalised with an eating disorder myself because I became so malnourished due to anorexia so I’m also aware that, even for children without underlying issues caused or exacerbated by certain foods, it’s possible to be too strict since most children want what they cannot have if they won’t experience any immediately obvious health consequences. Banning anything outright, unless it is terribly dangerous obviously, might not be the best way to teach healthy eating?

I mean there's different ways looking at it. You are saying not to do something regarding your child and yet they are not listening. I understand that you as mummy want to limit sugar intake and expect it to be followed which as his mummy you are free to put down and they should respect your wishes. I think FIL saying he can do what he wants is a bit far!
On the other hand it is only one day, if they looked after him full time and doing it every day then it would be more problematic to childs health. I wouldn't say anything for one day.
I've had a few issues with my MIL who im now NC but giving treats wasn't up there as the reason I went t nc. She'd give him sooo many things macdonads , 3 bowls ice-cream in one sitting, bags of crisps, cakes, sweets etc all in one day. I did think that's a bit much and dc did have a major sugar rush. But it was other things she was doing that spoilt our relationship. But I do understand the not listening to you it's a bit annoying, what else won't the listen yo or do as they please

They are his loved and loving grandparents, they won’t be around for ever, but in the future he will have wonderful memories of them .

Just be extra vigilant with teeth cleaning on their day . And as other have said if you don’t like the way they care for him then pay for a childcare provider that follows your rules.

Everything in moderation. I meet the kind of mums who tut when their kids are offered a sweet, and I have to be honest, the kids are not always super slim.
It's a balance. Hyperbole that sugar will kill them and they'll only want to eat sugar if they have it doesn't help, because it's just not true. Last night my DS chose to have a plain yoghurt as pudding.
My kids actually eat a reasonable amount of snack type food, and they are thin as threads. I really think exercise is the key.

I don’t agree with the majority saying to just accept it etc.

You have your boundaries and stick to them. If you show you can be bullied into accepting it, they’ll just keep going and escalating it because they know they can get away with it.

If they don’t respect and follow what you say, they don’t get to see their grandchild anymore.

Broadly agree with the majority of posters who are saying - count your blessings

However, they obviously like treating him - so why not supply them with a box of treats that you are happy for him to have (a middle ground between 3 chocolate bars a day and a thimble of raisins), and be clear that this is a 'weeks worth' and let them dish out as they see fit?

I agree that there is a difference between having an ice-cream out and being sat in front of TV with multiple chocolate bars - but are you sure you aren't imagining it's worse than it is to justify your frustration (that might be tied up with your eating history?). Not saying you are - just asking if it's a possibility?

What would you consider an acceptable compromise? Far better to go in with a compromised solution than a complaint.

This

I'm shocked at the majority of answers on here.

I find the very idea that sweets are treats to be harmful. And I say that as someone with a sweet tooth.

No wonder there is an epidemic of type 2 diabetes in children when the OP is criticised for not wanting her child to be given 3 chocolate bars on top of lots of other sugar one day a week.

I show my love for my dgd by making her her favourite meals and taking her to the park.

As for the person complaining that telling the truth about ultra-processed foods is just another way to oppress women!

I really wouldn’t worry! It’s one day. Having had 2 under 2 I am just so grateful if anyone has the girls and they can do what they want with them tbh.

But this is Mumsnet and all children should only be given massive salads and an occasional share of the chicken that will serve a family of four for three weeks 😆😆😆. Surely any grandparent who gives little Tristram a chocolate covered raisin should immediately be banned from seeing their grandchildren for the rest of their lives. I'm just surprised that no-one has suggested that the reason for the grandparents giving treats is due to early onset dementia 😆😆😆

My great auntie used to give me sugar cubes to crunch on as a treat.

I have not one single filling 😇

You are so bloody ungrateful. I would love to have my parents look after my child once a week. So what it’s once a week your child has a few extra treats. Unbelievable.