AIBU to have babysitting rules...

[finalstrawb]

... if I didn't ask for the babysitting?

We have very little support from family due to geography, but we make it work and never ask for help. MIL and FIL have asked to babysit as they love our DS - lovely for all of us, DS aged 2 gets time with GP, we get a few hours to ourselves. Babysitting between 12-5. WIBU to ask them to do no television. We severely limit screen time as DS is a bad sleeper and we find it helps. Also no sugar etc but we leave meals and snacks prepared.

If I requested childcare I wouldn't set rules but in this case AIBU? He has lots of toys and healthy snacks, they don't have to do anything except play with him (DS very spirited!)

Oops. Sorry 🙈

There is no “should be able to” when you’re talking about other people’s children. If they aren’t your child, you put up with the parents’ rules/restrictions (unless they violate your morality, like requiring that you use physical chastisement) or you shut up and move along. My in laws can expect 0 unsupervised time with my children (as can my own parents, but that’s down to them having all children removed by SS) due to them demonstrating with their other grandchildren that they can’t behave reasonably, though as I have a great relationship with them and will be a housewife for their entire childhoods, I anticipate them having a wonderful grandparent relationship with them as I can take them to visit at will, and vice versa.

OP, you are completely in the right. Screen time is known to impact brain development, but people can’t accept reality. If you were to say, “I’m going against medical advice to not vaccinate my kids”, people would (rightly!) eviscerate you, but somehow wilfully destroying your child’s attention span is the choice that gets cheered in, and following the evidence is “controlling” and holier-than-thou”.

You don’t need to constantly entertain a child. I doubt you did with your own children, I doubt your parents did with you. Set your grandchild up with a picture book and some toys and tell them you’re having a sit down for a minute.

Mumsnet has a lot of grannies who are outraged at the suggestion that they don’t have rights over other people’s children, and that they can’t bribe their grandchildren into loving spending time with them by frying their ability to concentrate with six hours of Cocomelon and loading them up on sweets. Literally elder abuse.

That's some spectacular hyperbole going on there.

My point still stands, that all these grandparents only think this way is because they are scared that their grandchildren won’t love them if they don’t give them loads of sneaky little treats that they don’t get from mum and dad. It’s pure selfishness, nothing to do with it being good for the child but just them wanting the rush of a grandchild who is sad to be returned to their parents because granny has let them eat, do and watch whatever they like. Do none of the posters who say “a little treat won’t do any harm” stop to consider that maybe the parents want to be the ones to give their own children those little treats?

FWIW at this stage, I don’t think you were being unreasonable at all. If something keeps your toddler up all night, it’s only fair to make sure it doesn’t happen.

@Nonaynevernomore & @saraclara - I suggested hiding the remote as I would feel that the grandparents if they are really wanting to spend time with their grandchild(ren), why would they want to be watching the news during that time? They will only have a few hours on the visit with the kids so why couldn't they read to them, bake with them, colour with them, play with them instead of plonking their bums on the sofa and turn on the telly?

How many parents are non stop attentive to their child for five hours straight? Seriously?

I was one of those SAHMs who loved every second of the toddler and pre-school years and was really into child development and playing, reading and interacting with my child (sickening, I know). But if you'd monitored me for five consecutive hours when my kids were two, you'd have found me doing housework, putting washing on, making phone calls, and yes, putting the news on.

Hiding the remote is controlling, patronising and devious.

@saraclara - you keep comparing how much time parents would spend with their kids to what I'm saying about the grandparents who clearly don't spend 24 hours a day with these kids so why can't they spend 5 hours (or less), with their grandchildren without needing a television on?

I'm not controlling, patronising or devious - I certainly wouldn't have what it takes to be any of those things.

What is it about spending that amount of time that would require a television to be turned on instead of doing something with the kids - go for a walk, do some colouring, playing fort building with sofa cushions?

As a parent who gets absolutely zero help, can I borrow this set of GPs?

As per usual, the hyperbole comes out with these threads - 5 hours of TV, pumped full of sugar etc. I don't think that is what we're looking at here.

I think you would be very reasonable to discuss with them what you would like to see. Be reasonable and explain why, it will help them understand and appreciate why you want that, not just, well "its my child". You bring your child up how you see fit (a mantra that has its limits) but I think you'd be foolish to risk souring a relationship that provides you with a degree of respite that many would be grateful for, over 15 minutes of Bluey and a biscuit.

I think TV and sugar to a minimum is more reasonable, especially for older people that might not have your stamina.

As a grandmother - no I don't think it is unreasonable at all to have some rules. My daughter had rules and I had my eldest grandson every Wednesday afternoon until he was three. However, also as a grandmother - I wouldn't have been able to manage with no telly at all. I took him to the play park when the weather was ok. I gave him lunch - she left it ready for him. We played together, but he didn't want to do that all the time and, quite frankly, I was just too tired to be able to play all the time! And too unfit - I couldn't sit on the floor, for instance. The television was a lifeline for me.

I always followed the rules about food and safety, but luckily there was no rule about television. She was sensible, she knew I knew she liked him to have interactive play and I did that as much as I could, but I couldn't do it all the time.

I suggest that you have rules about food and safety and you let her know about your preference regarding television and why, and you give some sensible suggestions about what they could do instead. Sensible as in taking into account what the grandparents can actually do, what they like to do etc. Maybe something out of the house?

I do NOT agree that it is the grandparents role to spoil the grandchildren. I have always tried to make sure that mine had some treats, but they were treats their parents approved of. That is part of the trust that a parent needs to have with the grandparents, in my opinion.

I think if you go in with rules like no TV, no juice, no chocolate then you might be on here in a few years time asking why no-one will babysit.
I also don't know why you didn't tell them no chocolate then first time they brought some rather than letting them waste money. They are probably going to give him a packet of buttons but as a one off this won't hurt.
If TV disturbs his sleep that's fair enough to say so but are they the type to stick him Infront of the TV for five hours? Surely they'd want to play with him as they've asked to babysit.
And I wouldn't worry about cleaning the house. They probably won't even notice.

I have a cousin ask me last minute to babysit her kid because she had an appointment. I was busy that day but rearranged my schedule to make it work because she needed help. She then proceeded to produce a long list of rules for her kid for me to follow. I reminded her rather forcefully that I was doing her a huge favor and I wouldn't put her kid in any danger, but she had to relax a bit. When she returned she was livid that I didn't follow her rules exactly. I vowed to never babysit for her again (and she has asked numerous times.) Don't burn bridges over small things OP.

I think you should let the grandparents work out their own ways to bond with him, provided they aren't doing anything dangerous. A bit of TV or sugar isn't going to do him any harm. If he's screaming all night due to watching a bit of TV before 5pm then there are some serious problems and it's something you should raise with your HV.

You can tell this is your first born.

I don't really understand why the grandparents get to bring 'treats' of chocolate if the parents don't give it. They could bring fruit, or a book, or just themselves. Kids don't need treats, and it doesn't seem like a good dynamic to associate dgp with unhealthy treats.

When looking after anyone's dc I follow their rules.

Agree

Gosh, what a dull parent you are.

Our GPs are far away but because IT IS A ONE OFF, of course they get to spoil their grandkids!!! That's the point of GPs.

For the benefit of your child having a great time with GP you can't face ONE day tired at work?

This is all about you, maybe think of your kid for once?

I don't think you're being unreasonable. It's your child.

This!

I completely agree with you. So many other people just stick the TV on for their kids daily which will be why they don't see the issue. It is so detrimental to their development.

I let my lo stay at grandparents for bonding time and they put the TV on despite our rule. What's the point in them going to spend time there just to sit infront of a tv?!

I agree with this so much!! They make such a deal about 'treats' it puts them on a pedestal, before they did this my mittle one loved passion fruit or mango for a treat!

My GD only drinks water, apart from breast milk ever, she’s not one for sweet things, she would rather have some berries, if you eat out she won’t have anything off the children’s menu, she will have salmon if it’s on the adult menu, she eats jacket potato’s most days with tuna and sweetcorn, she loves a salad she’s 4 years old!!
Her teeth are absolutely horrendous for a child so young and her dentist can’t figure out why!!
Shes even had teeth removed already!
So having bad teeth is not always anything to do with eating chocolate or something else

It’s one of those where the stricter your rules the less likely people are to offer to babysit for you again. There may come a time when you need them so I would just vaguely say not too much sugar as it makes them hyper active but leave it at that. I know people who have similar stringent rules for babysitters and wonder why none of their family want to babysit - it’s because it makes it hard work for them !

Depends on the child.

We were pretty chill with our first, but he was a fantastic sleeper. We were seriously uptight with our second as she was dreadful. Although her sleeping had regulated before she was two, so I sympathise with the OP sticking to whatever they know will make their lives less exhausting.