Birthday gift from the in-laws

[ProbablyNutsTBH]

Bit of background info: My in-laws are perfectly lovely people. They really love mine and their sons 13mo baby & would see him ALL the time if they could. For some reason, probably cos I’m potentially unhinged, I wouldn’t mind if they only saw him once a month or less. Ultimately they see him about once a week. Which is not enough for them & so Once it’s been 6 days mine and their sons phones are blowing up until we visit them or have them around.

anyway, it was my birthday recently & they were very keen to come over and give me some gifts (aka see their grandson). The gift is a handwritten “voucher” for a night in a hotel near a wildlife park a couple hours away that DH, DS & I have a membership pass to, along with dinner for two for DH and I ….
With “on-site” babysitting at the hotel.
As in, on site babysitting by MIL&FIL.
As in, they will also be coming to the wildlife park… & staying at the same hotel with us.
So they have essentially gifted me the birthday present of a night away with them, so they can have a holiday with their grandson. It just seems so disingenuous/underhanded?
The offer to pay for dinner for two at the hotel is kind, but in context it feels like it’s tacked on as some sort of trojan horse/ so they can justify it as being a “birthday gift”.. like why not just offer us a voucher for dinner for two without the other bullshit? And I can get my own mum to babysit or have options in that regards?

I’m not upset because I want a better gift of course. They could give me a toblerone as a birthday gift and I’d be appreciative… I genuinely wouldn’t give a rats arse if they didn’t give me a birthday present at all, and in fact I’d MUCH prefer that over them roping us into going away with them & acting like it’s a gift “for me”.
I also don’t think this is a “bad” gift in general- if it was a joint family gift for their son & I for Christmas or something, I wouldn’t think that much of it. But for a birthday gift for me personally it feels especially odd.

TL;DR in-laws, who constantly ask to babysit my 13mo & are pretty obsessive over him, gave ‘me’ a birthday gift- a ‘voucher’ to go with them to a wildlife park (that DH, DS & I already have yearlong entry pass to- a gift from my parents), then spend the night with them at a nearby hotel where theyll shout me and their son dinner at the hotel, while they babysit my baby. I feel like they’re being manipulative, im pissed off about it. I also realise my judgement might be clouded.

AIBU in thinking that this is pretty bizarre & manipulative/underhanded? Are they just being lovely & offering a lovely opportunity for me, DH & Bub to have a little holiday with baby sitters on hand & even dinner for two and my incredulous arse is feeling hostile over nothing?

Fine dining is not everyone's idea of a good time.

They are babysitting qhile yoh ams dh have a nice meal together ans a night in a hotel near somewhere you enjoy going

I di t think this is a trojan horse i think this is well intentioned

I would totally understand if you said they are not nice people. But from what you say, all they want is a close relationship with their grandchild.

I think they have organised something nice and respected that you are not ready to totally leave DC by booking them all into the same hotel.

I have three sons, and this scares me so much. I hope my future daughter in laws don't treat me like this...

But if your daughter was bad at responding to your messages, would you bombard your SIL with messages addressed to your daughter, thereby putting the responsibility of getting her to respond on him?

Are they bombarding, or is an ADHD infodump?

The difference to the recipient being what exactly?

In which case, why give OP the gift of dinner for two with her DH if dining out isn't something she enjoys? It doesn't make it a better experience if the food is shit rather than haute cuisine.

Surely if you were going to use your DIL as a conduit to your son, it should have been agreed beforehand with your DIL?

Bombardment is about control, and demands aresponse. Infodump is about sharing. You can reply with an emoji and get back to the sender in a week.

“COLIN- you said you would call soon? Thinking of coming round to yours today!”

An example text sent to OP. Do you think OP could send back an emoji and reply with in a week? Or does it demand a response?

You can have a low key dinner out without it being shit food.

Ha, that MIL is definitely an ADHDer.

The correct response here is for OP to yell across the room at her husband to call his mother. Or text "I lost him down the back of the couch". OP has clearly married into an ND family. She's not going to be able to change them. Getting offended about it is pointless.

Let me get this right.

According to you, MIL is allowed to bombard OP with messages addressed to her son demanding a same day response. Because she has ADHD. And OP just has to accept it.

But OP isn't allowed to feel hurt that she suspects her birthday gift from MIL comes with an agenda, based on her past and current experiences with MIL. Right.

Way to totally not get it.

You know from OP's posts that MIL has been sending that same damn text to her son for the past week. It's pretty standard communication in an ND household.

And of course the gift comes with an agenda. All gifts do. But this one is also very much about the OP, with her interests at the core. It's openly both things at once.

No, you're not getting it.

OP has clearly expressed on multiple occasions that this behaviour is bothering her, but you're excusing it by saying 'Ha! Classic ADHD!'

The longer this thread goes on, the more it becomes about NTs not getting ND communication. And the ILs being ND is a potential explanation for the whole gift situation.

I'm not excusing anything because the ILs haven't done anything wrong. OP herself says she hasn't discouraged that communication style. It's not bad, it's just different, and if it's bothering her, OP needs to tell them that.

You are the only person on this thread who keeps bringing up ADHD. The presence of which, BTW, doesn't invalidate other people's feelings.

OP literally said It feels pretty dehumanising to be a communication vessel. That's a pretty shitty way to be made to feel by your in laws right?

I don't think we're ever going to agree on this so I will leave it there this time.

OP has said that her DH has ADHD but hasn't said that her MIL has it. You are excusing all the annoying things that OP's MIL does by saying 'ha, typical ADHDer'. It would be fair enough if OP's MIL kept sending these messages to her son, but to involve OP in this way, without her consent, isn't fair.

My DD is the worst for responding to messages. I don't bombard him, but I have on occasions, messaged my son in law to ask if she's around, if I urgently need an answer and I'm not sure if she's seen my message.

He doesn't seem to mind at all. He knows what she's like!

He sounds very nice.

No, but it's highly genetic. And OP has said that she's never told MIL not to.

MIL is just sending text messages - you make it sounds as if she's bashing down the front door.

If it's that awful, then OP can send her a text telling her not to!

If my family sent a text like that, it would be intended to be funny for the recipient and to serve a purpose at the same time.

It's a great way of working with someone with ADHD. It uses humour, but gets the message through at the same time.

OP may wish to take notes. As I said, it's highly genetic, so she may end up having to use these strategies with her own son.

OP hasn't told MIL not to, but it does bother her as she says:

'Is a bit more fkd up than just getting me to pass on text messages. It feels pretty dehumanising to be a communication vessel.'

Surely it would be good manners of MIL to ask permission to send these messages on to her if they aren't getting any response from their son.

That's ridiculous.

I would expressly ask permission to communicate via a colleague, not a family member.

Tiptoeing around family sounds awful.

This sounds like type of family that just says things out loud. If OP dislikes it, she needs to say so.

Of course it's not ridiculous. They shouldn't need to ask permission to send a message to OP that is meant for her. However, these messages aren't even for the OP, they are addressed directly to her husband. They don't even have the manners to include 'Hi OP, could you pass this message on to Colin' in the message.

You don't know whether they would take offence if OP asked them directly to stop doing this. Tiptoeing around family does sound awful. I think OP should tell them to stop sending these messages to her and should stop facilitating their relationship with their grandchild as her DH should be doing this. However, I don't think they would take this very well at all as if it was left to her DH, they would hardly ever see their grand-child.

If she doesn't want to do that, she should just immediately delete any messages they send that aren't actually addressed to her and not even bother mentioning it to her DH.